State of Connecticut v. Carlos Ocasio (2010)

THE COURT:  So, I rescheduled or scheduled this hearing on Mr. Ocasio to address the situation that I thought about after the proceedings on Friday.   And that's this, that Mr. Ocasio had entered a nolo contendere plea to the charge of criminal possession of a firearm.   And the idea behind that was that if there was some legal defect in the presentation of the case the jury that invalidated the jury verdict that would, in effect, carry forward and invalidate his plea to criminal possession of a firearm.

In that regard I was mistaken.   I was confusing that criminal possession of a firearm charge with other status offenses like being a persistent offender that are oftentimes alleged in a part B information where, in fact, a defect in the underlying trial does affect the person's status.   But that's not the situation here.

So, yesterday I met with counsel and indicated that I was prepared to allow Mr. Ocasio to take back his plea to this criminal possession of a firearm charge and then there was a number of options that he would have going forward from that.

So, I know you had a chance to talk to him, Mr. Demirjian, but what's your client's decision?

ATTY. DEMIRJIAN:  We've talked, your Honor, I've explained the situation to him.   He has a good grasp of what the Court's speaking about.   We will make a motion to withdraw the nolo contendere plea.   He would indicate-he indicates that he'd like to waive the jury trial and have the Court make a determination based upon the facts that have been entered into in the underlying three charges along with the stipulation that counsel and I entered into regarding his record, and basically have the Court decide that-that last charge.

THE COURT:  Okay. And does the State want to be heard on that, the motion to withdraw the nolo contendere plea?

ATTY. HARRY:  No, your Honor.   The State understood what you were trying to do on Friday, and there's nothing actually different other than the wording involved.

THE COURT:  Yeah, procedurally it's different, but it does make a difference to the defendant.   So that the motion-

ATTY. HARRY:  Oh, yes, your Honor.

THE COURT:  Yeah.

ATTY. HARRY:  I understand.

THE COURT:  Sure. The motion to withdraw the nolo contendere plea is therefore granted.   And so what I'm going to do now is have the clerk put Mr. Ocasio to plea again, and I expect he'll plead not guilty, elect a trial by a court, and then I'll ask him a couple of questions about that.   All right.   Please put Mr. Ocasio to plea.

THE CLERK:  This is the case of the State of Connecticut vs.   Carlos Ocasio.   The docket number is FBTCR09243798T.   Are you Carlos Ocasio?

THE DEFENDANT:  Yes.

THE CLERK:  How old are you?

THE DEFENDANT:  Twenty-eight.

THE CLERK:  What is your date of birth?

THE DEFENDANT:  5/22/81.

THE CLERK:  Your Honor, the defendant was born on May 22, 1981 and is represented by Attorney Jonathan Demirjian.

THE COURT:  Okay, proceed.

THE CLERK:  Do you withdraw your prior plea and elections?

THE DEFENDANT:  Yes.

THE CLERK:  Does the defendant waive a full reading of the information?

ATTY. DEMIRJIAN:  Yes, we will.

THE CLERK:  To the sole count of the information charging you with the crime of criminal possession of a firearm in violation of Section 53a-217(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes, what is your plea?

THE DEFENDANT:  Not guilty.

THE CLERK:  And do you elect a jury trial or a bench trial?

ATTY. DEMIRJIAN:  He'd like to be tried by the Court, your Honor.

THE COURT:  Fine, okay, thank you.   I just want to ask you a couple of questions about that, Mr. Ocasio, and then we'll proceed.   You have an absolute right to have your case tried in front of a jury.   And I'd be prepared to pick another jury, as we did before, and select six people to listen to the evidence on that case and present it again.   Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT:  No, that's okay.

THE COURT:  Okay. And-but you understand you have the right to have it go that way?

THE DEFENDANT:  Yes.

THE COURT:  All right.   And is your decision to have a trial by the judge alone a voluntary decision on your part?   In other words, has anybody forced you or threatened you in any way to get you to make the decision?

THE DEFENDANT:  No.

THE COURT:  Okay. And have you had enough time to talk to Mr. Demirjian, your lawyer,about what decision you should make whether to go for a judge trial or a jury trial?

THE DEFENDANT:  Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT:  All right.   I find that the defendant's waiver of his right to a jury trial is his knowing and intelligent waiver.   I indicated to your attorney that if you chose to go this way, and you didn't have to choose to go this way, but if you did choose to go this way, whatever sentence I choose to impose, I'm going to structure it in a way that you're not going to get any extra time for this criminal possession of a firearm charge.   I told your lawyer that, I assume he told you that, so I want to tell you this on the record so it's clear that you know my intention as far as this charge is concerned.   So, do you understand that, Mr. Ocasio?

THE DEFENDANT:  Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT:  All right.   So now, will both counsel agree that I can consider all the evidence offered during the trial in assessing the defendant's guilt on this criminal possession of a firearm charge?

ATTY. HARRY:  Yes, your Honor, by the State.

ATTY. DEMIRJIAN:  Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT:  Would either side like to makeany further argument to the Court regarding that evidence and whether it does or does not include the elements of that crime?   Would the State like to make any argument to the Court?

ATTY. HARRY:  Your Honor, just for the record, I know you presided over the trial, but for the record, the State was prepared to offer the record, the criminal record of the defendant and witnesses to support that record, that the defendant had the qualifying prerequisites and was not supposed to have possession of the weapon.

THE COURT:  Okay. And there was a stipulation as to the record, so I will take that into account.   Would the defense like to make any argument to the Court?

ATTY. DEMIRJIAN:  No, your Honor, nothing else.

THE COURT:  Based on my review of all the evidence presented during the trial, I find that the State has established the elements of criminal possession of a firearm beyond a reasonable doubt, and so I make a finding of guilty on that charge.   And oh that charge, sentencing will occur on that charge together with the other counts of the information, July 9th as earlier indicated by the Court.   Okay.

Thank you very much.   This matter is adjourned until July 9th.

ATTY. DEMIRJIAN:  Thank you.

THE COURT:  Recess, please.

(The matter was concluded for the day)

December 9, 2010

Robert J. Devlin, Jr., Judge

Devlin, Robert J., J.