The Connecticut Supreme Court has ordered a new trial for Carlton Bryan, who was convicted of murder and conspiracy to commit murder. The court's decision, released on September 1, 2026, found that the prosecution violated the defendant's rights by presenting misleading testimony during his trial. This ruling could have significant implications for Bryan and the legal standards surrounding witness testimony in criminal cases.
Bryan was convicted in connection with the shooting death of Shamari Jenkins, who was pregnant with his child. The court's ruling stems from a habeas corpus petition Bryan filed, claiming that the prosecutor knowingly allowed false testimony to influence the jury's decision. The case highlights the importance of truthful witness testimony in ensuring a fair trial.
Background
Carlton Bryan was convicted of murder and conspiracy to commit murder in 2019 after a trial that relied heavily on the testimony of a witness named Kingsley Minto. Minto testified that he heard another man, Matthew Hall-Davis, confess to killing Jenkins at Bryan's request. During the trial, Minto denied having any deal with the prosecution in exchange for his testimony.
However, Bryan's defense argued that Minto's testimony was misleading and that the prosecutor, Senior Assistant State’s Attorney Donna Mambrino, failed to correct this misleading information. The habeas court initially denied Bryan's petition, leading him to appeal to the Connecticut Supreme Court.
The Ruling
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bryan, stating that the prosecutor violated the principles established in the 1959 case Napue v. Illinois. The court found that Mambrino allowed false or misleading testimony from Minto and Minto's defense attorney, Richard Cohen, to go uncorrected during the trial.
The court stated, "The prosecutor violated Napue by eliciting false or substantially misleading testimony from M and C concerning M’s agreement with the state, failing to correct the false impressions created by their testimony."
The judges involved in the ruling included Chief Justice Andrew McDonald and Justices D’Auria, Ecker, Dannehy, and Bright. The court emphasized that the misleading testimony was material to the case, stating that it could have affected the jury's verdict.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for Carlton Bryan, who will now receive a new trial. The court's decision underscores the critical role of accurate witness testimony in criminal trials. It also reinforces the legal obligation of prosecutors to correct misleading statements made by witnesses, ensuring that defendants receive a fair trial.
The ruling may also set a precedent for future cases involving witness testimony and prosecutorial conduct. It highlights the court's commitment to upholding due process rights and ensuring that justice is served in criminal proceedings.
What's Next
With the court's ruling, Bryan's case will return to the lower court for a new trial. It remains to be seen whether the prosecution will pursue the case again or if they will seek a different resolution. The ruling may also prompt discussions about the standards for witness agreements and the responsibilities of prosecutors in handling such cases.