State v. Keaton

Summary

The Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed Antoine Keaton's convictions for murder and criminal possession of a firearm. It held that his confrontation clause challenge to a computer-synchronized compilation of street-camera footage failed under State v. Golding because defense counsel affirmatively waived the claim by stating '[n]o objection' to its admission, and, alternatively, that the record was inadequate to determine whether the compilation was hearsay or testimonial. The court declined to exercise its supervisory authority either to adopt a bright-line rule requiring police to cease questioning a represented suspect until counsel is present or to reach the merits of his claim that detectives violated his right to counsel after he invoked it, concluding that the existing safeguards in Edwards v. Arizona and State v. Purcell remain adequate. No separate opinions were filed.