State of Connecticut v. Dominic Joseph Badaracco, Sr. (2013)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION FOR STAY OF IMPRISONMENT AND POST–TRIAL RELEASE UPON APPEAL

On June 27, 2013, the defendant, Dominic Joseph Badaracco, Sr. was convicted by a jury of bribery in violation of General Statutes § 53a–147.   Thereafter, on September 13, 2013, the defendant was sentenced on that charge to a seven-year term of imprisonment followed by three years of special parole.   In the present motion, the defendant:  (1) states his intention to appeal his conviction, (2) moves for a stay of execution of the sentence and (3) moves for the setting of an appeal bond.   A hearing on the motion was held on September 13, 2013.

Our Supreme Court has made clear that postconviction bail is entirely disconnected from the presumption of innocence and should be granted with “great caution.”  State v. Menillo, 159 Conn. 264, 269 (1970).   That said, it is also clear that the superior court has inherent common-law power and discretion to grant postconviction bail.  State v. Vaughn, 71 Conn. 457, 460–61 (1899).

In State v. McCahill, 261 Conn. 492 (2002), our Supreme Court examined the history of postconviction bail in Connecticut.   That analysis suggests that, for those persons eligible for postconviction bail, discretion rests with the trial court as to whether such bail should be granted, unless the trial court determines that custody is necessary to assure the defendant's appearance in court.  Id., 507.   Accordingly, in cases like the present one, the question of whether to grant bail pending appeal is committed to the discretion of the court.

In the present case, postconviction bail is inappropriate.   The nature of the crime for which the defendant was convicted (offering a $100,000 bribe to a superior court judge) demonstrates a complete lack of respect for the rule of law and the integrity of the judicial process.   The crime goes to the core of what our system of justice is all about.   The caution recommended in the older cases that postconviction bail should not be allowed when the crime is “serious,” see, e.g., State v. Vaughn, supra, 71 Conn. 461, is fully applicable to the present case.   Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more serious application of Connecticut's bribery statute.

For the reasons set forth above, the motion to stay the sentence and admit the defendant to postconviction bail is denied.

So Ordered at Bridgeport, Connecticut this 13th day of September 2013.

ROBERT J. DEVLIN, JR., JUDGE

Devlin, Robert J., J.