State v. Grant

179 Conn.App. 81

178 A.3d 437

STATE of Connecticut

v.David GRANT

AC 39921

Appellate Court of Connecticut.

Argued October 17, 2017

Officially released January 2, 2018

Daniel J. Foster, for the appellant (defendant).

Stephen M. Carney, senior assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, was Michael L. Regan, state's attorney, for the appellee (state).

DiPentima, C.J., and Lavine and Elgo, Js.

ELGO, J.

The defendant, David Grant, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a–55(a)(1) and 53a–55a, and assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a–59(a)(5).¹ On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly (1) admitted evidence of his involvement in the sale of drugs and (2) permitted the state on redirect examination to inquire as to whether a witness had observed the defendant carrying a firearm on a prior occasion. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

On the basis of the evidence adduced at trial, the jury reasonably could have found the following facts. At approximately 1:40 a.m. on June 24, 2012, a 911 dispatcher with the Norwich Police Department received reports of a shooting at the Mai Thai restaurant and bar in Norwich (establishment). Officers Steven Schmidt and Patrick Lajoie, who were investigating a complaint at an American Legion hall located approximately one third of a mile from the establishment, responded to an emergency dispatch. They arrived moments later and encountered a chaotic scene as patrons fled the establishment. Schmidt entered the building and immediately discovered an unresponsive female, later identified as Donna Richardson, lying in a pool of blood on the floor. Richardson was transported by emergency personnel to the William W. Backus Hospital, where she was pronounced dead. Following an autopsy, the medical examiner determined that her cause of death was a gunshot wound to the chest and that the manner of death was a homicide. While conducting that autopsy, the medical examiner removed a projectile from Richardson's body and gave it to a detective with the Norwich Police Department, who packaged it as evidence.

A second patron at the establishment, Crystal Roderick, suffered a gunshot wound to her right thigh. Although she heard gunshots, Roderick did not see her assailant. Roderick was transported from the establishment to the William W. Backus Hospital, where medical personnel determined that a bullet was lodged in "a very superficial location" in her thigh. A surgeon later removed the bullet, which was secured by members of the Norwich Police Department.

On the night of the shooting, both Richardson and Roderick had attended a high school graduation party held in a private room at the establishment. Roderick testified that, later in the evening, "[t]here [were] a lot of people" at the establishment, including the defendant and a person known as Steven Velez, whom she identified as "Cuda." Approximately fifteen minutes before being shot, Roderick had a conversation with the defendant, whom she described as a friend, on a deck at the rear of the building that served as the main entrance to the establishment. During that conversation, Roderick exchanged phone numbers with the defendant, who "smelled like he was drinking."

Ashleigh Hontz was at the establishment that evening with her mother to celebrate a friend's birthday. Hontz saw the defendant and Velez together, both of whom she previously had known, and remarked to her mother that she found the defendant's attire unusual for "what you wore out at night," particularly because she had seen the defendant in the same attire at a retail store earlier that day. When "last call" was announced at approximately 1:30 a.m., Hontz retreated to her vehicle in a parking lot by the deck. She heard a scuffle on the deck and then observed the defendant and Velez descending its stairs. At that time, Hontz watched as the defendant "pulled a gun up with his right hand and fired ... [s]traight up into the deck aimlessly, it looked like." She continued to observe the defendant as he walked to the front of the building and entered a vehicle driven by Velez, which "drove away fast."

In his testimony at trial, Anthony Zemko provided a similar eyewitness account. Zemko arrived at the establishment sometime before 1:30 a.m. to pick up a friend. He parked his vehicle directly across from the deck and waited while "facing directly to the back of the building." Zemko then saw two men coming down the stairs of the deck when the second one "lost his balance a little bit and fell over to the railing.... [H]e didn't fall completely. He stumbled into the stair rail and handrail, and something fell out of his waistband .... It landed on the ground and made a bang with a flash." Zemko testified that the item appeared to be a pistol, and continued: "That gentleman picked the pistol up, put it in ... his right pocket [and] began walking away .... [He] then spun around and took the gun out and just pointed at the crowd [on the deck] and started shooting." Zemko testified that the two men then fled in a speeding vehicle. When the police officers arrived at the establishment moments later, there were approximately thirty to fifty people on the deck.

Norman Tonucci was working as a groundskeeper at the Mohegan Sun casino on June 24, 2012. Approximately six hours after the shooting, Tonucci discovered a firearm on top of a bed of mulch by the entrance to the casino. Law enforcement officials also recovered spent shell casings from the establishment and ammunition found in front of the American Legion hall located a short distance from the establishment. The firearm, shell casings, and ammunition were compared with the projectiles removed from the bodies of the two victims by Jill Therriault, a firearms and toolmark examiner with the state Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection's division of scientific services. In her report, which was admitted into evidence, Therriault concluded that the projectiles and shell casings were associated with the firearm. She also testified at trial that the projectiles recovered from the victim's bodies both were fired from the firearm recovered near the Mohegan Sun casino. In addition, DNA samples were extracted from the firearm. Subsequent forensic testing revealed multiple contributors. Although Velez was not "a source of or contributor to" any of the DNA samples, the defendant was included as a contributor to one of the samples. At trial, Dahong Sun, a forensic examiner at the state forensic science laboratory, testified that the expected frequency of individuals who could be a contributor to that particular sample was "less than one in seven billion in the African–American, Caucasian, and Hispanic populations."

Velez also testified at the defendant's criminal trial. At that time, he was incarcerated and had multiple charges pending against him. Velez testified that he was a drug dealer and had moved from New York to Norwich to make money "[s]elling drugs." On the night of the shooting, Velez had been drinking alcohol with the defendant at a friend's house. Sometime around midnight, they headed to the establishment. When the lights later came on at the bar to indicate that it was closing, Velez exited through the deck at the rear of the building. Velez testified that he then heard gunshots and ran to his vehicle, which was parked at the front of the building. When the defendant then appeared around the corner, Velez told him to get in the vehicle, and they quickly departed. Velez testified that he asked the defendant what had happened, and the defendant replied that he had fired shots after seeing "Zay," an individual also known as Isaiah Lee. Velez testified that the defendant had a gun in his hand when he entered the vehicle. As they drove away, the defendant "threw some bullets" out the window and later tossed the gun "somewhere" along the highway. When the defendant received a phone call informing him that someone had been shot, the two proceeded to Brooklyn, New York, where they parted.

Several months later, the defendant was arrested in Maryland as a fugitive from justice and agreed to be extradited to Connecticut. During the trip to Connecticut, officers from the Norwich Police Department advised the defendant of his Miranda rights² and proceeded to question him about the shooting. Because the audio recording equipment in the vehicle was not working properly, the officers conducted a second interview upon returning to Norwich. At that time, the defendant provided a written acknowledgement of his Mirandarights. In the interview that followed, the defendant admitted to being the shooter at the establishment on June 24, 2012. A digital video recording of that interview was made, which was admitted into evidence and played for the jury at trial. The defendant also provided a written statement to the police, which also was admitted into evidence.

In those statements, the defendant indicated that he arrived at the establishment approximately thirty minutes before closing time on the night of the shooting. He had been drinking heavily and was "wasted" at that time. When he was on the dance floor, Velez approached him and handed him a revolver while noting that Zay was across the room. The defendant acknowledged that he did not "know Zay too well, but I know he goes around shooting at people" and had shot at both Velez and another friend in the past. As Velez and the defendant headed to the deck area, the defendant observed that Zay "was standing there like he did have a gun" and was "moving around like he was getting ready to do something."

In his statements to the police, the defendant indicated that Velez then told him that he was going to start his vehicle. At that time, the defendant fired a shot in Zay's direction. When asked why he had fired that shot, the...