State of Connecticut v. Daniel J. Ouellette

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant's convictions, holding that the existing record did not establish that the state and its cooperating witness had an undisclosed agreement that differed from the plea arrangement disclosed at trial. The discrepancy between the state's trial representation and its later sentencing presentation was insufficient, without evidence explaining its cause, to establish a due process violation under the governing disclosure principles. The court nevertheless directed sentencing courts to inquire into cooperating witnesses' plea agreements and related trial representations when the state attests to their cooperation.