Background
Connecticut charged Devoni Miller with several offenses, including murder, arising from events in Cromwell on or about September 11, 2023. Because murder is punishable by life imprisonment, the Connecticut Constitution and General Statutes § 54-46a required a hearing and a judicial finding of probable cause before Miller could be required to stand trial.
After conducting the probable-cause hearing over four days, the trial court issued a memorandum finding probable cause to believe that Miller committed the charged murder. Miller appealed that determination, and the Connecticut Supreme Court received the appeal by transfer from the Appellate Court. The state moved to dismiss, arguing that the probable-cause finding was not a final judgment subject to immediate appellate review.
The Court’s Holding
The Connecticut Supreme Court granted the state’s motion and dismissed the appeal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Relying on State v. Atkins and the final-judgment test established in State v. Curcio, the court held that a trial court’s probable-cause determination is not a final judgment that may be appealed immediately.
The court rejected Miller’s arguments that Atkins lacked precedential force because it was brief and that later cases undermined its reasoning. It also rejected her contention that delayed review would irreparably deprive her of a constitutional right not to stand trial. Although the Connecticut Constitution protects against trial for a qualifying offense without a probable-cause hearing and determination, a claimed defect in that proceeding does not create an immediately appealable right not to be tried. Miller may challenge the probable-cause determination after conviction and sentencing.
Key Takeaways
- A finding of probable cause permitting a prosecution for an offense punishable by death or life imprisonment is not a final judgment under Connecticut law.
- A defendant ordinarily must wait until after conviction and sentencing to obtain appellate review of the probable-cause determination.
- The brevity of a prior per curiam decision does not diminish its precedential force.
Why It Matters
The order reaffirms a firm jurisdictional limit on interlocutory criminal appeals in Connecticut. Defendants cannot obtain immediate appellate review merely by characterizing an alleged defect in a probable-cause proceeding as a violation of the constitutional protection against being held to answer for a qualifying crime without probable cause.
The ruling also distinguishes a right not to be tried at all from a right whose violation can be remedied after trial. Because an erroneous probable-cause determination remains reviewable after conviction and sentencing, it does not satisfy the final-judgment requirement for an immediate appeal.