Hinds v. Commissioner of Correction

Summary

The court held that the petitioner’s failure to challenge the kidnapping instruction before the law changed did not procedurally default his claim because retroactive application of the corrected kidnapping interpretation made the procedural-default bar inapplicable. Applying the direct-appeal harmless-error standard, the court concluded that the instructional omission was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and affirmed the order for a new kidnapping trial. The court further held that, even assuming cumulative trial error could support habeas relief, the three identified trial improprieties did not collectively undermine the fairness of the trial.