State of Connecticut v. Rafael Crespo, Jr.

Summary

The court affirmed the judgment upholding the defendant’s convictions, concluding that the trial court properly excluded evidence of the victim’s prior sexual conduct. The evidence was too attenuated to establish bias, motive, or interest under the applicable statutory exception, and the defendant failed to show that limiting inquiry into the specific sexual acts violated his confrontation or defense rights. The court also held that the defendant’s unpreserved claim did not satisfy the requirement of showing a clearly existing constitutional violation.