State v. Jones (2013)

Connecticut Appellate Court · 2013 · Evidence

140 Conn. App. 455 (2013)

Updated August 22, 2026

EvidenceConfrontation ClauseJury access to exhibitsPolice personnel filesPractice Book § 42-23submit to juryvideo exhibitbusiness records

Facts

Police stopped a rented Dodge Charger, and during the stop the car backed into Officer Rodriguez and then ran over his left foot before speeding away. A dashboard camera in a marked cruiser recorded the stop and pursuit, and the DVD of that recording was admitted as a full exhibit and played repeatedly during trial, but the court lacked equipment to send into the jury room and told the jury it could request to view the video in the courtroom during deliberations. Rodriguez received treatment at a medical center, but the treating physician was unavailable at trial, so the emergency department director testified from the medical records, which were admitted without objection, and stated the treating physician diagnosed a contusion/crush injury. The defendant also subpoenaed Rodriguez’ personnel file, but defense counsel admitted he lacked a good faith basis to claim it contained relevant material and argued only speculative inconsistency-based concerns about Rodriguez’ truthfulness.

Issue

Did the trial court err by allowing the jury to review the admitted dashboard-camera video only in the courtroom during deliberations rather than in the jury room? Did the admission of testimony from a supervising physician based on treatment records violate the defendant’s confrontation rights? Did the court err by refusing to conduct an in camera review of the police officer’s personnel file absent a specific factual basis showing likely relevant impeachment material?

Rule

Under Practice Book § 42-23, exhibits received in evidence must be submitted to the jury, but 'submit' means making the exhibit available to the jury for consideration, study, decision, or judgment; it does not require physical placement in the jury room when the court provides the best legitimate means available for review. Under the Sixth Amendment, only testimonial hearsay implicates the Confrontation Clause, and medical records created for diagnosis and treatment, rather than for use in prosecution, are nontestimonial. A defendant is entitled to in camera review of confidential police personnel records only upon a specific threshold showing of a reasonable likelihood that the file contains material relevant to the case or useful for impeachment; mere speculation or a fishing expedition is insufficient.

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

At a robbery trial in Hartford, the court admitted a store surveillance video as a full exhibit. The courthouse had no standalone player for the jury room, and the only available laptop also contained nonadmitted files, so the judge told jurors they could send a note during deliberations and watch the video in the courtroom with the parties present.

Did the judge fail to submit the exhibit to the jury as required by the applicable rule?

Explanation. The majority held that the rule requiring admitted exhibits to be submitted to the jury is mandatory, but 'submit' means to commit or make the exhibit available for the jury’s consideration, study, decision, or judgment. Physical placement in the jury room is not required when the court provides the best legitimate available means for review. Because the judge made the video available through courtroom playback when no suitable jury-room equipment was available, the exhibit was properly submitted.