****************************************************** 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. ******************************************************
HERMAN DIAZ v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION (AC 25647)
Lavery, C. J., and DiPentima and Harper, Js. Submitted on briefs May 27—officially released July 19, 2005
(Appeal from Superior Court, judicial district of Tolland, geographical area number nineteen, White, J.) Katharine S. Goodbody, special public defender, filed a brief for the appellant (petitioner). Matthew C. Gedansky, state’s attorney, Jessica Probolus, special deputy assistant state’s attorney, and Angela R. Macchiarulo, senior assistant state’s attorney, filed a brief for the appellee (respondent).
Opinion
PER CURIAM. The habeas court dismissed the amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus that was filed by the petitioner, Herman Diaz. The petitioner claimed that his trial counsel rendered ineffective legal assistance and that he was actually innocent of the crimes of which he was convicted. The petitioner appeals following the court’s denial of his petition for certification to appeal. We dismiss the appeal. We have reviewed both the issues raised by the petitioner in his amended petition and the court’s resolution of those issues. We conclude that the petitioner has not demonstrated that the issues raised are debatable among jurists of reason, that a court could resolve the issues in a different manner or that the questions raised deserve encouragement to proceed further. See Lozada v. Deeds, 498 U.S. 430, 431–32, 111 S. Ct. 860, 112 L. Ed. 2d 956 (1991). Having failed to satisfy any of those criteria, the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the court’s denial of his petition for certification to appeal reflects an abuse of discretion. See Simms v. Warden, 230 Conn. 608, 616, 646 A.2d 126 (1994). The appeal is dismissed.
