NO: M09M-CR15-206930-S

SUPERIOR COURT

M09M-CR15-209931-S
STATE OF CONNECTICUT

JUDICIAL DISTRICT
OF MIDDLESEX

VS

AT MIDDLETOWN, CONNECTICUT

TONY MORENO

HEARD ON JULY 8, 2015

PROCEEDINGS AT TIME OF ARRAIGNMENT AT HARTFORD HOSPITAL

BEFORE:

THE HONORABLE DAVID P. GOLD

A P P E A R A N C E S :
Representing the State:
ATTORNEY PETER MCSHANE, A.S.A.
Office of the Assisant State's Attorney
1 Court Street
Middletown, CT 06457
Representing the Defendant:
ATTORNEY JAMES STEWART MCKAY
Office of the Public Defender
1 Court Street
Middletown, CT 06457

Reported and Transcribed By:

Margaret L. White, CSR
Certified Shorthand Reporter

101 Lafayette Street

Hartford, CT
THE COURT:

Good morning, everybody.

ATTY. MCKAY:

Good morning, Your Honor.

ATTY. MCSHANE:
THE COURT:

06106

Good morning.

This is the matter of State V Tony Moreno.

The record should reflect that this Court is conducting

an off-site judicial proceeding in Mr. Moreno's hospital
room.
Present in the hospital room is Mr. Moreno, who is in
his hospital bed.

Also in the room along with me are a

marshal, a bail commissioner, the court clerk, the victim's

advocate.

Mr. McShane is here on behalf of the state.

And

the Court has already appointed and will now formally appoint
for the record Mr. McKay, the public defender, to represent
Mr. Moreno.
The reason that the Court has authorized this off-site
judicial proceeding in the hospital room is as follows:

The

defendant has just now been served with two arrest warrants.
These warrants were signed by this Court approximately two
or three hours ago.

It is now approximately noon, and the

Court signed the warrants I believe at about 9:30 this

morning, or one of the warrants.
The warrant that this Court signed this morning, is the
arrest warrant which charged Mr. Moreno with murder and
murder with special circumstances.
Since the date and time at which the murder is alleged

by the state to have occurred, the defendant has been

inpatient, initially at Middlesex Hospital where he was
initially brought after he was taken from the river and he
was then LIFE STAR'd, as the Court understands, here to
Hartford Hospital where he's remained inpatient since that
time.
It is the Court's further understanding although the
defendant is not medically stable enough to be discharged
from this facility, his condition currently is not such that
would allow him safely to be transported to court for his
presentment on these charges.
It is the Court's additional understanding that the
defendant upon this processing here will be taken into the
custody of the Department of Correction; will be transported
to an appropriate hospital setting within the Department of
Correction where he will remain for the immediate future as
his medical needs continue to be addressed.
Accordingly, these off-site proceedings have been
authorized by the Court, and the Court will be complying with
section 1-24 of the Practice Book, which requires the Court
to have a transcript made of the off-site judicial
proceedings, and to make that transcript available to the
public.
So Madam Court Reporter, the Court will be requesting
an expedited transcript be made of these proceedings and that
it be placed in the court file available for the public
inspection.

Moreover, and in accordance with 1-24, this matter will

also be scheduled for tomorrow, which will be the tenth (sic)
of July.
It is my understanding -- I'm going to inquire of
Mr. McKay in just a moment.

It is my understanding that

given the defendant's continued need for medical treatment,

including mental health issues, that it would not be
advisable to have the defendant present at tomorrow's
proceedings.

So tomorrow will be a no-body mitt.

If that's all right with you, Mr. McKay.

Would there

be any objection to the defendant not being present at

tomorrow's court appearance?
ATTY. MCKAY:

No objection to that at all.

appropriate, Judge.

I think it's

I think you mentioned tomorrow as being

the tenth.
THE CLERK:
ATTY. MCKAY:

It's the ninth.

It is the ninth.

I have discussed this

with Mr. Moreno.

THE COURT:

The Court is conducting tomorrow on the

record a hearing consistent with the requirement of 1-24 that

requires the judicial authority to state on the record in
open court by the next court date a summary of what occurred
at such proceeding.

The Court intends to do that tomorrow

in the Middlesex court.

Having covered the reasons for today's off-site
judicial proceeding I now, Mr. Moreno, want to advise of you
your constitutional rights.

You have the right to remain

silent.

Anything you say about your case can be used against

you in court.
attorney.

You have the right to be represented by an

You have been interviewed and been found eligible

by the public defender for the services of the members of

that office and based on your request, the Court has
appointed Mr. McKay to represent you in connection with both
of these files.
Have you had an opportunity to speak to Mr. McKay?
THE DEFENDANT:
THE COURT:

Yeah.

You should also know that you have a lawyer

who will represent you for throughout these proceedings.

If

you do wish to answer questions about your case, your lawyer

can be with you while you answer the questions.

You can also

stop answering the questions at any time you wish.

You have the right to plead not guilty to the charges
against you.

If you plead not guilty, you may elect to have

a trial either before a jury or before a judge.

And in either

case, the trial will be held in a public and speedy fashion.

You do have the right to rely upon a reasonable and posted
bail, a reasonable bail.
One of the matters that will be taken up in the
proceeding today is for the Court to hear from the parties
as to what the bail should be and the Court will then make
the determination as to what the bail will be in this case.
You should also know that if you're not a citizen of the
United States, if you're convicted of this crime that
conviction could result in your deportation, exclusion from

admission into the United States, or denial of

naturalization pursuant to the laws of the United States.
If you're not a US citizen and wish to have your
consulate notified of your arrest, please let Mr. McKay know
that and he will alert the court of your request.
Then, Mr. McKay, you're accepting appointment on both
of these files on behalf of Mr. Moreno?
ATTY. MCKAY:
THE COURT:

We are, Your Honor.

Thank you.

Then I think we'll turn now to

the issue of bail.

Madam Bail Commissioner, have you had an opportunity to
interview Mr. Moreno?
BAIL COMMISSIONER:
THE COURT:

Yes, Your Honor.

Could you report to the Court the findings

of your investigation.
BAIL COMMISSIONER:

Mr. Moreno is 21 years of age.

He

indicates he's been living here in the State of Connecticut

for approximately 18 years.
his mom in Middletown.

He is currently residing with

He has no prior convictions on his

record.
May I approach, Your Honor?
THE COURT:

Yes.

BAIL COMMISSIONER:

All right.
Based on his lack of criminal

record, and based on the serious nature of the charges, I

would be asking for a $1 million bond on the murder charge,
and $10,000 on the other file.
THE COURT:

Mr. McShane.

ATTY. MCSHANE:

As Your Honor knows, the other file that

Madam Bail referred to was the two counts of violation of

restraining order in that there's a court set bond in the
amount of one hundred cash only.
Your Honor is familiar with the case.

And in the second

file that is the murder in the -- murder with special

circumstances file, in that Your Honor has signed, reviewed
and signed that arrest warrant application.
I will note although lack of prior record the state is
concerned, and does want a high bond, and I will ask for a
bond higher than recommended.
THE COURT:
ATTY. MCKAY:

Thank you.

Mr. McKay.

Your Honor, I understand the nature of the

charges in that these would ordinarily require a high bond,

I'd like to reserve the right to contest or argue for a lower
bond at a later date if that becomes appropriate.
THE COURT:

All right.

Your comments are noted.

The Court did, as I indicated a moment ago, have occasion

to review the warrant charging Mr. Moreno with murder and
murder with special circumstances.

And the Court having

reviewed that warrant had indicated on the warrant itself

that the bond would be set in the amount of $2 million.
While I have taken into account the comments of the bail
commissioner and, in particular, the fact that the defendant
does not have a prior disclosable record, and also is a
Middletown resident with significant ties perhaps to the
community, the Court feels that the seriousness of the

charges and the strengths of the evidence, defenses against

the evidence, warrants the setting of a $2 million bond on
that new warrant for murder and murder with special
circumstances.

So the bond is set in the amount of $2

million cash or surety on that file.

As to the other file on which there's a $100,000 cash
only, I'll convert that to $100,000 cash or surety bond.
ATTY. MCSHANE:

We do have some other matters to

address, the other matter with regard to the hearing of

probable cause.
THE COURT:

All right.

ATTY. MCSHANE:
requires 60 days.

As Your Honor knows, the statute

I was just wondering, I haven't had a

chance to speak to Mr. McKay, if Attorney McKaye will waive

it at this time given the fact that tomorrow we have a no-body
mitt, there may be some time with regards to the defendant
being at Garner or some other facility.
THE COURT:

Well, it would be the Court's intention to,

as I indicated, docket the case for tomorrow.

But given Mr.

Moreno's condition, and Mr. McKay's lack of objection, not

have Mr. Moreno present tomorrow in court.

But the Court

will be docketing the matter for July 21st at which would

be the next day on which the Part A docket would be heard.
Now, Mr. McKay, I'll ask you regarding two potential
waivers, the first would be given the nature of the case it
would normally be transferred to the Part A docket but the
defendant would normally first appear in the GA court, do

you waive any rights your client might have to appear in the
GA for a formal transfer?
ATTY. MCKAY:
THE COURT:

Yes, Your Honor.

All right.

And with regard to the facts

that are on the murder warrant the Court will be required

to schedule a hearing in probable cause.
Mr. McShane has raised the issue of whether or not the
defense is willing to waive the -- at least for the time
being, the 60 day requirement in essence excluding the time
between now and the court date on the 21st, excluding that
-- excluding that 14 days or so, 13 days from the 60 days,
what would be the defense's position on that?
And then I suspect that can be something which we take
up again on the 21st.

But what's the defense's position with

regard -- regarding this period between now and the 21st?

ATTY. MCKAY:
on the 21st.

Judge, I guess I'd prefer to take that up

I think I can address it at that time having

had a chance to review the evidence somewhat and talk about

the issue.
THE COURT:

Mr. McShane, I don't think there's a formal

agreement.
ATTY. MCSHANE:
THE COURT:

That's correct.

So the period pending between now and the

next court date will be counting toward the 60 days.

And

then Mr. McKay will, I guess, on the 21st advise the Court
as to whether or not any additional time beyond that date
will be excluded from the 60 days.

ATTY. MCSHANE:
THE COURT:

The state is aware the clock is ticking.

And there are other matters.

ATTY. MCSHANE:

There are other matters.

One, with

regard to the violation of restraining order warrant, there

is a sentence in there that has nondisclosable information
in that warrant and I ask that that be redacted.
THE COURT:

Mr. McKay, this is a matter that had -- I

had occasion to discuss prior to the formal proceeding

beginning.

Do you have any objection if that single

sentence that contains nondisclosable information be

redacted from the warrant that will be made public?
ATTY. MCKAY:
Honor.

I think that would be appropriate, Your

I support that request.

THE COURT:

All right.

Then I'll direct the prosecutor

to speak to the clerk to ensure that the unredacted copy of

that warrant be kept under seal.

Court orders that seal.

And this is a single sentence that will be redacted that

contains, in the Court's opinion, nondisclosable
information.
The Court further finds the public right to that
information is outweighed by the defendant's right to keep
that information confidential.

So the motion to redact that

and to make a redacted copy available is granted.

ATTY. MCSHANE:

Thank you.

And one other matter, if

Your Honor please, with regards to the violation of

restraining order file.

I apologize.

I keep referring to

it, I don't have a docket number at this time, but with regard

to that file we do not -- we have a protective order with

regards to the victim in that case in that it had been
reviewed by Family Relations beforehand.

It appears to be

in order.
THE COURT:

All right.

Mr. McKay, do you want to be

heard at all on this protective order?

ATTY. MCKAY:
THE COURT:

No, Your Honor.

All right.

Mr. Moreno, the Court hereby

advises you it is issuing today an order of protection for

the protection of -- for the protection of a woman who the
initials are A.O.

Do you know to whom I'm referring?

THE DEFENDANT:
THE COURT:

Yes?

THE DEFENDANT:
THE COURT:

(NODDING.)

Yes.

This order provides as follows:

You may

not assault, threaten, abuse, harass, follow, interfere

with, or stalk her.

You must stay away from her home or

wherever she may reside.

You may not contact her in any

manner and that includes no written contact, no electronic

contact, no telephone contact.

And do not contact her home,

workplace, or have contact with others with whom the contact

will be likely to cause a nuisance or alarm to A.O., the
protected person.
This also further prohibits you from possessing any
firearms or ammunition.
You are hereby advised, Mr. Moreno, that any violation
of this order should you have made bail could result in your

bail being revoked and, moreover, it could result in you

facing additional charges which would be punishable by up
to five years in prison.
Do you understand the terms of this order?
THE DEFENDANT:
THE COURT:

Yes.

Mr. McKay, you'll take copies of this order

for Mr. Moreno.

ATTY. MCKAY:
THE COURT:

I will, Your Honor.

All right.

We're not going to enter pleas

on the murder because we're going to continue that, I guess.

Pleas of not guilty with a jury election could enter on the
first file.
ATTY. MCSHANE:
THE COURT:

Please.

But no pleas enter in the murder file,

because that's just being continued for a later scheduling

of a hearing in probable cause.
Anything else from the state?
ATTY. MCSHANE:

Just two things.

One, is that counsel

has served a copy of the protective order.

Two, the state

has nothing else to add with regard to the circumstances in

which we have come to -- come here at the hospital for the
arraignment.

I think the Court has covered it fully.

I will note that the defendant was present, did answer

any questions Your Honor posed to him.

He appears to be

following what's going on here.

THE COURT:

All right.

to add for the record?

Mr. McKay, anything you'd like

ATTY. MCKAY:

No.

I think this is an appropriate

proceeding, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

All right then.

The only other matter that

I'd like to address would be conditions that should be

reflected on the mittimus that will accompany Mr. Moreno to
the Department of Correction.
It is my understanding, Mr. McShane, that doctors with
the Department of Correction have been alerted to the fact
that Mr. Moreno will be placed in their custody; and
protocols and arrangements are in place so that Mr. Moreno
can maintain his treatment, and also be placed in an
appropriate hospital setting to address both his medical and
mental health needs.
Am I correct?
ATTY. MCSHANE:

That's correct, Your Honor.

Every

detail, including even a special transport unit is here today

and the doctors are aware of it.

The one thing that the

doctors at the Department of Correction indicated it would

be helpful to have something from the hospital.
THE COURT:

Well, Mr. McKay, to the extent that that

invites you to provide on Mr. Moreno's behalf medical records

that reflect the nature of the care and conditions, and the
conditions that Hartford Hospital have addressed in the
recent days; I'll leave it to your best discretion as to how
to proceed.
On the mittimus that I'll have the Court issue, I'll ask
the mittimus to reflect that the defendant receive medical

attention to include, but not be limited to, the mental

health treatment that is deemed appropriate.

And further,

that the Department of Correction put into effect any

necessary observations, supervision, and/or housing
protocols as deemed necessary to address the defendant's
medical and mental health needs.

And further, to ensure

that he may be maintained in the custody of the Department

of Correction safely.
Anything further, or anything else that you'd recommend
on the mittimus, Mr. McShane?

Or anything you would like

amended on the mittimus, Mr. McKay?

ATTY. MCKAY:

I don't believe so.

I would just

indicate that we had conversations with one of the nurses

here who I think is making plans with the marshals to
transport his records with him.
THE COURT:

All right.

to coordinate that.
ATTY. MCKAY:

Thank you.

We will make sure that happens, Judge.

ATTY. MCSHANE:
THE COURT:

Well, then you'll be available

State has nothing.

Nothing further.

Then the matter is

continued to tomorrow with a no-body mittimus.

The Court will ask that a mittimus commanding the
production of Mr. Moreno also be issued for the 21st.
And, Mr. McKay, if you receive word in the days as we
approach the 21st that Mr. Moreno's condition is not such
where that can be done safely, please let the Court know.
ATTY. MCKAY:

Will do.

Thank you, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

Anything?

ATTY. MCSHANE:
THE COURT:
All right.

Hearing nothing else --

Thank you.

Ma'am Clerk?

Thank you, Your Honor.

Nothing else for the record.

Then the court's adjourned.

Thank you.
(WHEREUPON, THE MATTER CONCLUDED.)

NO: M09M-CR15-206930-S

SUPERIOR COURT

M09M-CR15-209931-S
STATE OF CONNECTICUT

JUDICIAL DISTRICT
OF MIDDLESEX

VS

AT MIDDLETOWN, CONNECTICUT

TONY MORENO

HEARD ON JULY 8, 2015

C E R T I F I C A T I O N

I hereby certify the foregoing pages are a true and correct

transcription of my stenographic notes of the above-referenced
case, heard in Superior Court, Judicial District of Middlesex, at
Middletown, Connecticut, before the Honorable David P. Gold, Judge,
on the 8th day of July 2015.
Dated this day the _____ of __________________, 2015, in
Hartford, Connecticut.

________________________________________
Margaret L. White, CSR
Certified Shorthand Reporter