Court Opinion

ID: 9699902
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 20:55:45.736231+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:59.716514
License: Public Domain

Bogdanski, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur in the result but disagree with the majority on the issue of the defendant’s alleged waiver of his constitutional rights.
As my colleague, Speziale, J., has pointed out in his opinion, the issue is not whether the guilty plea was invalid because the trial court did not expressly warn the defendant of the rights he was waiving. Rather, the issue is whether there is any mention anywhere in the record of the constitutional rights waived by the defendant when he entered his guilty plea.
Nowhere are those constitutional rights even summarily mentioned by defense counsel, the state’s attorney or the court. The record is empty of any such reference. This court cannot presume from such a silent record a waiver of those three important constitutional rights: the privilege against self-incrimination, the right to a jury trial, and the right of confrontation. Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 243, 89 S. Ct. 1709, 23 L. Ed. 2d 274; State v. Battle, 170 Conn. 469, 473, 365 A.2d 1100. In order for a plea of guilty to withstand appellate review, the record must affirmatively disclose a waiver of those rights. That affirmative showing is wholly lacking in this case.