******************************************************

The ‘‘officially released’’ date that appears near the

beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will

be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the

date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative

date for the beginning of all time periods for filing

postopinion motions and petitions for certification is

the ‘‘officially released’’ date appearing in the opinion.

In no event will any such motions be accepted before

the ‘‘officially released’’ date.

All opinions are subject to modification and technical

correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the

event of discrepancies between the electronic version

of an opinion and the print version appearing in the

Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the

latest print version is to be considered authoritative.

The syllabus and procedural history accompanying

the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official

Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service

and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes

of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of

the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal

Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut.

******************************************************
MARQUIS JACKSON v. COMMISSIONER

OF CORRECTION

(SC 19360)

Rogers, C. J., and Palmer, Zarella, McDonald, Espinosa and Robinson, Js.

Argued February 22—officially released June 28, 2016

Peter Tsimbidaros, for the appellant (petitioner).

Rita M. Shair, senior assistant state’s attorney, with

whom, on the brief, were Michael Dearington, state’s

attorney,Eugene R.Calistro, Jr., senior assistant state’s

attorney, and Erika L. Brookman and Timothy J.

Sugrue, assistant state’s attorneys, for the appellee

(respondent).
Opinion

PER CURIAM. The issue in this appeal is whether

the habeas court properly denied the petition for a

writ of habeas corpus filed by the petitioner, Marquis

Jackson. The petitioner was convicted, after a jury trial,

of eight charges arising from a robbery and murder

committed in 1999 in New Haven and was sentenced

to a total effective sentence of forty-five years imprisonment.1 The Appellate Court affirmed the judgment of

conviction. State v. Jackson, 73 Conn. App. 338, 341,

808 A.2d 388, cert. denied, 262 Conn. 929, 814 A.2d 381

(2002). The petitioner thereafter filed a petition for a

writ of habeas corpus in which he claimed, among other

things, that he was deprived of his sixth amendment

right to effective assistance of counsel during his trial

because his counsel had failed to conduct an adequate

pretrial investigation and had failed to adequately present a defense at trial.2 After a trial, the habeas court

denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The

petitioner then appealed from the judgment of the

habeas court to the Appellate Court, which affirmed

the judgment. Jackson v. Commissioner of Correction,

149 Conn. App. 681, 714, 89 A.3d 426 (2014). We then

granted the petitioner’s petition for certification to

appeal to this court limited to the following issue:

‘‘Whether the Appellate Court properly concluded that

the habeas court properly determined that criminal trial

counsel had rendered effective assistance with regard

to cell phone evidence?’’ Jackson v. Commissioner of

Correction, 313 Conn. 901, 96 A.3d 558 (2014).

After examining the entire record on appeal and considering the briefs and oral arguments of the parties,

we have determined that the appeal in this case should

be dismissed on the ground that certification was

improvidently granted.

The appeal is dismissed.

1 The petitioner was convicted of one count of felony murder in violation

of General Statutes § 53a-54c, three counts of robbery in the first degree in

violation of General Statutes § 53a-134 (a) (2), two counts of attempt to

commit robbery in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a49 and 53a-134 (a) (2), one count of conspiracy to commit robbery in the

first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-48 and 53a-134 (a) (2),

and one count of carrying a pistol without a permit in violation of General

Statutes (Rev. to 1999) § 29-35 (a). See State v. Jackson, 73 Conn. App. 338,

340–41, 808 A.2d 388, cert. denied, 262 Conn. 929, 814 A.2d 381 (2002).

2 For purposes of this appeal, the relevant pleading is the petitioner’s

amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus dated October 10, 2009.