MMX-CR14-0 675616T ; MMX - CR13-0200821T

MMX-c v 14 - 5 4
STATE OF CONNECTICUT

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
SUPERIOR COURT
JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF
MIDDLESEX
AT MIDDLETOWN ,
CONNECTICUT

v.
Em-lARD F . TAUPIER

SEPTEMBER 11 , 2014

BEFORE THE HONORABLE DAVID P . GOLD , JUDGE

A P PEA RAN C E S
Representing the State :

ATTORNEY BRENDA HANS

As s istant State ' s Attorney

One Court Street

Middletown , CT 06457

Representing the Defenda n t :

ATTORNEY JON L . SCHOENHORN
108 Oak Street
Hartford , CT 06106-1514

ATTORNEY ALI SHA C. MATHERS

P . O. Box 465
Enfield , CT 06083-0465
ATTORNEY JOHN R. DONOVAN
Donovan & Morello
154 West Street
CROMWELL , CT 06416

Recorded & Transcribed By :

Dana Wilson
Court Recording Monitor
One Court Street
Middl e town, CT 06457

(Proceedings begin at 1 : 02 p . m. )

1
2

THE COURT :

Let me call Edward Taupier .

And

it ' s going to be re - called , but I just want to have

this aspect of it resolved .

(Pause)

THE COURT :

All right .

So Mr . Taupier was last

before the Court on Monday of this week .

Attorney Hans here on behalf of the state .

ATTY . HANS :

10
11

Good afternoon , Your Honor .

Brenda

Hans .
THE COURT :

Mr . Taupier is represented now by

12

Attorneys Donovan , Mathers and Schoenhorn .

13

Schoenhorn today has filed an appearance only in the

14

threatening file , but what I want to make clear now

15

for the record is what the status is of Mr . Taupier ' s

16

representation on the voyeurism file .

17

18
19

Mr .

So , Ms . Mathers , what ' s -- I understand an in

lieu of appearance was filed .
ATTY . MATHERS :

Yes , Your Honor .

An in lieu of

20

appearance was filed i there was a misunderstanding

21

between my client and myself regarding the status of

22

Attorney Donovan .

23

to proceed as lone counsel on the voyeurism charge .

24

r will be representing Mr . Taupier strictly in the

25

divorce .

26

will be filing his appearance in lieu of mine .

27

Mr . Taupier would like Mr . Donovan

So at this time I believe Attorney Donovan

THE COURT :

Well , Mr . Donovan , what ' s your

2
1

position on becoming involved again in Mr . Taupier ' s

case on the voyeurism?

ATTY . DONOVAN :

counsel in that file .

THE COURT :

I ' m agreeing to remain as

And Mr . Jelly still of counsel in

that case as well?

ATTY . DONOVAN :

Well , he was -- I ' m just

wondering , and I ' m inquiring of the clerk , if Ms .

Mathers ' appearance is withdrawn do I have to refile

10

an appearance?
THE CLERK :

11

12

It would probably be much cleaner if

you did , sir , at this point .

13

ATTY . DONOVAN :

Then I ' m more than happy --

14

THE COURT :

Why?

15

THE CLERK :

Because she filed in lieu of both

16

Jefferson Jelly and Attorney Donovan , so hers is the

17

only one of record at this point .

18

with all this controversy about it , it would

19

THE COURT :

20

Jelly filing --

So particularly

Is Mr . Jelly filing -- then is Mr .

21

ATTY . DONOVAN:

22

THE COURT :

I ' m assuming he will .

Well , if that -- if Ms . Mathers '

23

appearance in lieu of is recognized then Mr . Jelly ' s

24

out .

25
26
27

ATTY . DONOVAN :

That ' s correct.

And I will

inform him of the proceedings today .

THE COURT :

All right .

So , Mr . Taupier , do you

3
1

understand that?

THE DEFENDANT :

THE COURT :

Yes ,

I do .

Ms . Mathers filed an appearance

representing that she alone was representing you on

the voyeurism and on the threatening file .

THE DEFENDANT :

THE COURT :

That ' s correct .

Now , Mr . Schoenhorn is now saying

he ' s representing you on the threatening file

because , Mr . Schoenhorn , you filed an appearance in

10

lieu o f Ms . Mathers?

11

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

12

THE COURT :

In lieu of Ms . Mathers , yes .

But I ' m now being told by Mr .

13

Donovan that Mr . Donovan is going to file in lieu of

14

Ms . Mathers on the voyeurism file , so Mr . Donovan now

15

appears as your sole counsel on these voyeurism .

16

you understand that?

17

THE DEFENDANT :

18

THE COURT :

Do

I do , yes .

Now , until Ms . Mathers filed her

19

appearance in lieu of you also had Mr . Jelly

20

representing you on the voyeurism file , but under the

21

current

22

Donovan is your only attorney on the voyeurism case .

23

Do you understand that?

24

THE DEFENDANT :

25

THE COURT :

status , as we ' ll be leaving it right now , Mr .

Yes ,

I do .

So if it ' s your intention to retain

26

Mr . Jelly to represent you along with Mr . Donovan on

27

any file then you must have him appear in court and

4
1

file an appearance because he ' s no longer of record .

Do you understand that?

THE DEFENDANT :

THE COURT :

I do , yes .

So , all right .

that issue resolved , I believe .

has nothing to add ,

for the record .

ATTY . HANS :

THE COURT :

Well , then we have

Obviously the state

just wants to get this all clear

Thank you , Your Honor .

All right .

So then we have further

10

matters that need to be addressed today on the

11

threatening file , wh ich we ' ll take up this afternoon .

12

So everyone is excused until two o ' clock .

13

14

Mr . Donovan , you ' re free to go because you ' re

not involved in the threatening case .

15

And, Ms . Mathers , you ' re out of both cases .

16

ATTY . MATHERS :

17

THE COURT :

19

ATTY . MATHERS :

20

THE COURT :

22

Yes , Your Honor .

Thank you , very much .

18

21

Criminal .

So you ' re free to go .

Thank you .

And , Mr . Schoenhorn , I ' ll see you

after lunch .
ATTY . DONOVAN :

Your Honor , just for the record

23

there was -- last week when I was on vacation a

24

protective order that was issued in the file that I ' m

25

representing him on --

26

THE COURT :

There was .

27

ATTY . DONOVAN :

There may be the necessity in

5
1

the future to request a Fernando hearing in

connection with that .

THE COURT :

All right .

you ' ll move for one should you want one , correct?

ATTY . DONOVAN :

THE COURT :

ATTY . MATHERS :

THE COURT :

10

Well , then -- well ,

Thank YOll , Judge .

All right .

Thank you .

So that ' s where we stand .

And we

\.,.ill pick this up after lunch .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

And with the agreement of

11

Attorney Hans , there is -- the case in chambers that

12

the Court recalled there was a decision about the in

13

rem matter and this is -- we agreed that this would

14

be the case and we would like the Court to look at it

15

before we actually have it on the record and we ' re

16

giving a copy of State v . Reddy , R-E-D - D- Y, which --

17

unless the Court is aware of a different one , this is

18

the one we were - - we found .

19
20
21

THE COURT :
is the case .

All right .

I ' ll take a look if this

Thank you , for alerting me to the case .

ATTY . DONOVAN :

As far as a new date is

22

concerned , this case was originally scheduled for

23

this coming Tuesday .

24

ATTY . HANS :

That ' s correct , Your Honor , the

25
26

THE COURT :

Is that right?

27

THE CLERK :

Yes , Your Honor .

6
1

ATTY . HANS :

THE COURT :

Yes .
9/16 .

Yes , sir .
Okay .

So ,

I guess we ' 11 say

9/16 , but I suspect if there ' s a change in that

schedule I ' ll have the clerk contact you , Mr .

Donovan .

ATTY . DONOVAN :

THE COURT :

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

All right .

THE COURT :

11

ATTY . HANS :

12

(Recess at 1 : 09 .

14

So two o ' clock , Your Honor ,

or 2 : 15 or what would the Court ' s pleasure?

10

13

Certainly , Your Honor .

Yes , 2 : 15 .

Thank you.

Thank you , Your Honor .

Unrelated matters heard

and resume at 3 : 53 . )
THE COURT :

Good afternoon , everyone , and thank

15

you for your patience .

16

record in the Taupier case now having earlier this

17

morning or earlier today rather , having resolved to

18

some extent the state of the record concerning Mr .

19

Taupier ' s legal representation .

20

Now , we are back on the

So what brings us back on the record , as I

21

understand it , today is the firearms seizure hearing .

22

The Court really knows nothing about the

23

circumstances of that seizure , but had docketed , as

24

it normally does , a firearms hearing for today .

25

Earlier today , sometime this morning , Mr . Schoenhorn

26

filed his appearance and the matter that now has to

27

be considered is the 29-38c here .

7
1

ATTY . HANS :

Correct , Your Honor .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Well , procedurally , if I just

may before we even get started .

understanding that there ' s a family docket number

that ' s been assigned to that matter .

document -- a docket number by Attorney Hans , who

I wrote it on the copy of a motion , but I have no

idea whether there ' s an ac t ual civil docket number ,

because it wouldn ' t be part of the criminal , the

10

THE COURT :

And actually I don ' t

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

14

THE COURT :

18

know where the

Yes .

-- which is the clerk ' s file is

simply Docket No . MMX-CV14-S4 .

16
17

was given a

FAM came from , but the file that I ' m looking at - -

13

15

statute itself says it's separately civilly docketed .

11

12

It ' s my

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Oh .

So it ' s -- so if I

may
THE COURT :

And I ' m only guessing it , this may

19

be the 54 th of these hearings , 54 th asset - - not asset

20

forfeiture

21

54 th firearms seizure hearing .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

All right .

I thought maybe

22

that would be the 54 th civil case in this building ,

23

but obviously I ' m not sure about that .

24

permi ssion then to change the FA

25

THE COURT :

26

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

27

filed?

If I may have

Of course .
-- to CV on the motion I just

(Pause)

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

And for the record , Attorney

Jon Schoenhorn representing Mr . Taupier as the

respondent in this matter .

THE COURT :

Yes .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

I just want to make sure that

the court reporter ' s caption reflects that for now --

we ' re not talking about a civil matter , although at

some point before the end of the day I may want to

10

address the conditions on the criminal matter because

11

I noticed the court ' s order said there would be an

12

opportunity to review them on the 11 th and that ' s

13

today .

14

THE COURT :

Yes .

All right .

So you have filed

15

a motion to dismiss the in rem action , and I suspect

16

by in rem you ' re referring to the firearm seizure?

17

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

18

THE COURT :

19

Yes .

And to return unlawfully , what you

allege is unlawfully , seized property?

20

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

21

THE COURT :

Yes , Your Honor .

All right .

So are there any other

22

matters, Mr . Schoenhorn , procedurally that you wanted

23

to take up before this court continues?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

24

25

Do you mean in the criminal

case?

26

THE COURT :

Well , in any case .

27

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Well , procedurally at some

9
1

point I just want to address the issue of the

conditions of release , that ' s the only procedural

matter that I want to address .

THE COURT :

All right .

That ' s the only thing .

Then where -- so , yes , Ms . Hans .

ATTY . HANS :

Brenda Hans , Assistant State ' s

Attorney for the people of the State of Connecticut ,

Your Honor , in this matter .

five witnesses that have been here since 9 : 00 this

We ' re ready -- we had

10

morning , we released them on the hearing on the risk

11

charge .

12

\vere over 100 cases on the S Docket today .

They ' re placed on-call status .

13

THE COURT :

14

ATTY . HANS :

I kno w there

It was a busy day .

I just received the motion to

15

dismiss that pertains to the risk .

16

p . m.

17

what we have as state ' s exhibit , the three page at

18

risk search and seizure warrant .

I ' d ask that it be

19

marked 10 only at this juncture .

I know that

20

Attorney Schoenhorn does object to it being admitted

21

as full .

22
23
24

I have

THE COURT :
look .

It ' s now 4 : 00

to initiate the hearing I ' ve marked

Does or doesn't?

Well , then I won ' t

You ' ve asked that an exhibit be marked .

ATTY . HANS :

Yes , Your Honor .

For 10 purposes

25

only because it ' s really the crucial document in the

26

hearing .

27

THE COURT :

All right .

Well , then it ' s been

10
1

marked for identification .

review it , but what I ' m trying to do is ascertain the

most efficient way to address the many issues that

could be the subject of a hearing today .

ATTY . SCHQENHORN :

THE COURT :

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

The Court ' s not going to

May I suggest something?

Please do .
I say that because I ' m

raising both in personam and subject matter

jurisdictional claims in my motion that for purposes

10

of that motion and that motion alone , the Court may

11

without objection look at the -- because I ' m claiming

12

deficiencies in both the document and its service and

13

notice to the respondent in this case .

14

be able to determine that the Court wouldn ' t

15

necessarily have to look at the document , just like

16

i f this was a regular civil -- I know you haven ' t

17

civil in probably , I don ' t know , 20 years because

18

I ' ve known where you ' ve sat and presided , but the

19

judge might have to look at both the complaint and

20

the service of process in any civil case , that

21

doesn ' t mean the court is considering the truth of

22

any of the matters contained therein , it ' s a matter

23

of whether it sets forth certain information and

24

complies with the statute .

25

In order to

sat

So as long as the Court feels that it could

26

review the actual document and service and return

27

without being prejudiced as to its contents , because

11

othenvise it ' s rank hearsay and I would certainly

object to it being considered for the truth of the

matter asserted .

THE COURT :

So you said this challenges subject

matter and in personam

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

8
9

In personam , yes .

What is the -- the in personam is

the service?
ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

He ' s never been served with

10

this and the document itself , even if the Court just

11

looks at the return , it says it

12

Hartford State ' s Attorney ' s Office .

13

indication that a copy was ever sent , nor \Vas a

14

notice sent from the court to him .

15

represent that an e-mail was sent yesterday to

16

Attorney Mathers , who again , just because she

17

represents Mr . -- or had represented Mr . Taupier for

18

a few days in a criminal matter does not constitute

19

service or notice under the statute .

20

that of

21

about this yesterday , so -- and when I said earlier

22

today the fact that Ms . Hans said well , she only saw

23

the motion today , that ' s because last night was the

24

first time anybody saw this document at all , that is

25

on the defense side .

26

THE COURT :

27

~-Jas

returned to the

There ' s no

I will certainly

So the fact

as a matter of fact , we only found out

All right .

And the subject matter

jurisdiction is a different claim than the service?

12
1

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

4
5

And that is?

THE COURT :

Is it Paragraph 4 of your motion

that just challenges the constitutionality of 29 - 38c ?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

10

11

The subject matter

jurisdiction claim is that the document --

Yes .

And 3 .

Without probable cause .

So yo u ' re

challenging the sufficiency of the allegations within

the warrant .
ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Yes .

Similar to when one

12

would have a complaint , one would file 'a motion to

13

strike in a regular civil case as to wh ether the

14

allegations are sufficient to even proceed with a

15

hearing .

16

THE COURT :

All right .

So I guess this is the

17

first step along the way , and the state has seen this

18

motion for the first time and hearing of these claims

19

for the first time and it would seem that we need to

20

give the state an opportunity to research the issues

21

presented and then , do you see the motion requiring

22

evidence , Mr . Schoenhorn , or is it something that is

23

done on the papers and on argument of counsel?

24

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

I believe that this motion is

25

argument , it ' s argument on the face of the papers ,

26

although

27

THE COURT :

So it ' s a four corners --

13
1

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

-- although my knowledge --

if the state was going to claim well , that the --

let ' s say the challenge was to the marshal ' s return

of service , if there had been one , all right .

there ' s none the Court decides it on the papers .

there ' s a question of , let ' s say , whether abode

service was sufficient , you call the marshal , he

testifies where he left it , what efforts he made .

But I submit that on the face of these documents

If
If

10

there ' s not only insufficient service under the

11

Practice Book , there is no service which therefore

12

specifically violates 29 - 38c in its requirements ,

13

therefore that would also go to - - that this is

14

subject matter jurisdiction as well as in personam

15

because this is a constitutional right that ' s being

16

infringed on .

17

Reddy, which I believe we handed up to the Court --

And if the Court has look at State v .

18

THE COURT :

I did .

19

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

-- before the lunch break , it

20

seems to make clear that the term " shall " in this

21

status is mandatory subject , however , to waiver , and

22

in that case the waiver by the defendant and there ' s

23

certainly no waiver -- I want to be -- here --

24
25

THE COURT :

Well , I mean , I guess we ' ve started

the hearing .

26

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

27

THE COURT :

Right .

So I don ' t think there ' s any issue

14

really as to the timeliness of the proceedings .

Today is , if I understood correctly based on our

discussions , wi thin the 14 days that 29-38c requires .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

Right .

But I suspect ha v ing started now

with the receipt and preliminary argument from the

respondent on the motion to dismiss it is appropriate

for the Court to allow the state to have an ample

opportunity to respond to the motion .

So I suspec t ,

10

unless I am convinced otherwise , that I ' ll be

11

continuing the case today to a later date at which

12

time I will be expecting the defense -- I ' m sorry ,

13

the state to be prepared to respond to the state ' s

14

[sic] motion to dismiss the

15

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

16

THE COURT :

You mean the defense motion .

Well , the respondent ' s motion ,

17

right .

The respondent ' s motion , I may have misspoke ,

18

but -- and it would seem to be useful for the parties

19

up until that date to discuss whether there will be

20

the need for any evidence to be received by the

21

Court .

22

documents were not served on the defendant and the

23

state feels that that is correct then I guess the

24

parties can agree to that .

25

service wasn ' t required or that there was some

26

functional equivalent of that then the state can

27

argue that , but I guess one of the things that would

If Mr . Schoenhorn is correct that these

If the state feels that

15
1

be useful is to have the parties consult before the

date , our next date , so that we can proceed on the

date we choose .

4
5

6
7

So is there anything else we can do today to

make any other progress on the motion?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

If

I may .

(Pause)

If I - - I think perhaps .

ATTY . HANS ;

Your Honor , on behalf of the state

10

I ' d like to formally , under Practice Book Section 10-

11

31a , I am the adverse party being the recipient of

12

this formal motion to dismiss that just was handed to

13

me and was just filed to the court .

14

separate legal grounds.

15

has done his homework , they ' re very complex issues ,

16

he ' s very thorough .

17

disadvantage and are not , because we were just served

18

this , able to go forward more in the in rem hearing .

19

I know we started it and I ' ve certainly submitted an

20

exhibit for identification .

21

THE COURT :

No .

There are five

Of course , Mr . Schoenhorn

We are at a distinct

I ' ve already said .

It ' s my

22

impression that the thing now to do is to pick a date

23

so that you have a chance to get up to speed .

24

motion was filed in court , you know , 10 minutes ago ,

25

and we need to give the state some time to reply as

26

it deems appropriate .

27

commenced the hearing and because this issue , I think

The

So is there anything - - having

16
1

by law , must be taken up first before anything else

can be decided .
ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

I ' m only stating , Your Honor ,

that to the extent that the Court has now indicated

that it ' s giving the state time to respond , I want at

least for the record very clearly state I object ,

that I believe the statute specifically mandates that

t he hearing be held within the 14 days , and Reddick

as I

read -- I mean Reddy rather , R- E- D-D-Y .

10

THE COURT :

Right .

11

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

That ' s at 135 Conn .

I believe it ' s very clear

I would just also then add

12

that it ' s mandatory .

13

that , I ' m not sure in Reddy they specifically argued

14

this , but because it implicates second amendment

15

rights , that it therefore would

16

Supreme Court precedent the second amendment is

17

deemed as imp ortant as the first amendment , who knew .

18

But in any event , because of that it is an

19

infringement of the most fundamental right , and

20

therefore , I submit , that the terms are very

21

stringent , similar to when we have restraining

22

orders , family law , domestic violence restraining

23

orders , the hearing must be held within 14 days

24

unless the parties agree to a continuance .

25

said that , whatever ' s going to happen is going to

26

happen , but I do not want the record to suggest that

27

I acquiesced in that without maintaining that we need

and under U. S .

So having

17
1

to go forward with the full hearing and make the

determination about the sufficiency of the

proceedings .

THE COURT :

So it would be your position , having

filed this , the state has to be now prepared to

address constitutional questions , probable cause

issues , service questions , all between 4 : 10 p . m. and

tomorrow at 5 : 00 and the Court has to independent

review your claims , the claims of the state and issue

10
11

its ruling by tomorrow?

ATTY. SCHOENHORN :

Well , at least let -- the

12

record should reflect that my copy of the motion ,

13

wi thout knov,ring the docket number , was handed to Ms .

14

Hans this morning before ten o ' clock or right around

15

10 : 00 a . m.

16
17

THE COURT :

All right .

start at ten o ' clock .

18

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

19

THE COURT :

20

21

That even by -- we ' ll

Okay .

So it would still have to - - that

would still be your position?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Yes.

As was the fact that a

22

lawyer, not my client , but the lawyer for Mr . Taupier

23

became aware of this proceeding yesterday late

24

afternoon from an e-mail and voicemail from the

25

clerk .

26

my evening right after dinner researching all of this

27

for today , and I appreciate Ms . Hans ' comments about

So to the extent that I spent a good deal of

18
1

my thoroughness ,

like to be .

I was clearly not as thorough as I ' d

THE COURT :

this as well or not ?

Well , are you going to want to brief

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

No .

I ' d like it

I ' d like

to be heard on the arguments and looking at -- on the

face of the documents it ' s my position that the Court

could make that determination .

10

However ,

like I said ,

just want my position at least clear on the record .

THE COURT :

All right .

Well , I will make two

\VeIl , I ' m going to make two corrunents in

11

findings

12

response to that , also for purpose of the record .

13

No . 1 , we have begun the hearing in the Court ' s view

l4

with the first order of business having be to

15

determine this Court ' s jurisdiction to go any

16

further .

17

Secondly ,

I don ' t

think the Reddy case in which ,

18

I believe the first sentence of the opinion or very

19

near that says , both parties agree this should be

20

reversed , which is a little different than what we

21

have here .

22

days being extended for good cause has really been

23

foreclosed by Reddy .

24

started in a timely fashion and secondly ,

25

having done so it is now appropriate to allow the

26

issues, which admittedly are complex and involve

27

constitutional and statutory interpretation , should

So I don ' t

think the issue about the 14

But I think the case has been

I think

19
1

be fully addressed by this Court and not in a summary

fashion .

litigate this so that the interests of their

respective clients can be protected .

Both parties should have an opportunity to

So , Attorney Hans , how much time would you like

When I say "replyH I don ' t mean

to reply?

necessarily in writing , though you are certainly

invited to do that and direct the Court to any case

law .

I suspect there will be little and Mr .

10

Schoenhorn has indicated he ' s not going to be

11

briefing the issues , leaving the Court to do its own

12

research as to whether or not this statute involves a

13

violation of the constitutional right to bear arms ,

14

which one would see as a somewhat complex question ,

15

but ...

16

ATTY . HANS :

Your Honor , I ' m simply asking for

17

what the Practice Book allows me under 10-31a , that

18

I -- any adverse party -- and I ' m quoting it

19

directly -- any adverse party shall have 30 days from

20

the filing of the motion to dismiss to respond to the

21

motion to dismiss by filing and serving, in

22

accordance with Sections 10-12 throu gh 10-17 , a

23

memorandum of law in opposition , and where

24

appropriate supporting affidavits as to facts not

25

apparent on the record .

26

that I also under those provisions, 10-31a , I would

27

be submitting my memorandum at least five days before

I would submit to the Court

20
1

the actual hearing and to give Attorney Schoenhorn

notice .

I , as far as -- I agree with the Court , we ' ve

started this hearing and I don ' t think there ' s any

case law that Mr . Schoenhorn can cite that says we

have to complete the hearing within the 14 days .

myself, have five witnesses and other exhibits aside

from the pre - marked exhibits that I ' ve alread y

i dent ified with the Court .

10

I,

There ' s one other thing I wanted to say , Your

11

Honor , just for the record .

12

cases where a judge , finding good cause , can continue

13

right in the middle of trial.

14

motion and you ' re supposed to be within the 120 days ,

15

if good cause is found then it can be continued .

16

THE COURT :

I ' m aware .

There are a bazillion

If it ' s a speedy trial

I ' ve already found that

17

we have begun the hearing and feel there is good

18

cause to proceed in the manner that I ' m now

19

identifying .

20

But , Mr . Schoenhorn , having stressed that this

21

is a civil matter , how do you respond to the state ' s

22

claim then the rules of civil

23

rules should apply and therefore counsel should have

24

30 days to reply?

25

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

the Practice Book

Well, I believe that the

26

language of the statute supersedes the generic civil

27

rules , just as in restraining orders and there are

21
1

other special ,

I believe , there are other special

kinds of hearings that have to be held within a

certain period of time .

injunction filed ,

files a motion to dismiss does not automatically

delay if ,

Amendment rights it doesn ' t automatically go another

30 days .

don ' t

If there ' s a preliminary

the fact that the opposing par ty

let ' s say , an inf ringement of First

Having said that , however , all right ,

necessarily - - we ll ,

let me be clear ,

I don ' t

10

agree that the hearing has actually started because

11

\-le ' re talking about it -- a hearing means under the

12

definition of due process , wit nesses are called ,

13

evidence is presented .

14
15

THE COURT :

Well , now wait .

You filed a motion

challenging my jurisdiction .

16

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

17

THE COURT :

Right .

I can ' t go beyond that .

Do I

18

understand the civil la w enough to know that must be

19

addressed immediately when raised?

20

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

21

THE COURT :

22

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Yes .

Or cannot proceed further .

Yes .

But I -- so my position

23

simply is that in light of the specific time frames

24

in the statute , that the 30-day rule doesn ' t apply in

25

the Practice Book the statute itself supersedes the

26

generic time frame for pleading and whatnot .

27

THE COURT :

And it would then require the brief

22
1

and response to pleading to be done within less than

24 hours so that it could all be --

ATTY .

THE COURT :

SCHOENHORN :

That \.;ou ld be my request .

All right .

Well , the Court is going

to give the state what it bel ieves is ample

opportunity , but at the same time will attempt to

recognize that the spirit of this statute at 29-38c

is for a defendant or a respondent or an individual

whose guns are seized , to have an opportunity for

I ' m going to direct

10

prompt review of that seizure .

11

the state to be prepared to present argument in a

12

shorter period than the 30 days .

13

Now f

14

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Mr .

Schoenhorn ...

May we go off the record then

15

if we ' re going to discuss timing , just do it off the

16

record for a moment then?

17

18
19

THE COURT :

Okay .

(Discussion off the record . )

THE COURT :

So we're now back on the record

20

having had an opportunity off the record to discuss

21

scheduling .

22

intention to direct the state to be prepared to argue

23

the motion in less than 30 days and also to submit

24

any filings , responsive pleadings in less than 30

25

days as well , attempting to balance the Practice Book

26

rules against the special rules in 29-38c .

27

having had a chance to discuss the weeks ahead with

It had been the Court ' s already stated

But

23
1

counsel , I ' m advised that Attorney Schoen horn is

already ordered to begin jury selection on Monday ,

this coming Monday .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

Yeah , yeah .

So three days from now .

Right .

And he anticipates that after jury

selection evidence will begin and won ' t conclude

until October 3 rd with jury deliberations perhaps on

10

the 7 th .

11

state is directed to reply in writing , if it chooses

12

to do so , no later than September 30 th , and we will

13

then have our argument on October 9 th

14

suggest we schedule that for eleven o ' clock and that

15

way I

16

before then .

17

29-38c seizure is continued for further proceedings

18

before this Court on October 9 th

19

So \vhat I will order is as follows : The

and I would

can handle the few cases that I have tha t day

All right .

Now , so the hearing on the

Now , Mr . Schoenhorn , you ' ve asked to be heard

20

with regard to certain other aspects of the criminal

21

case .

22

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Yeah .

And just before we go

23

to that , I just want to make sure that - - assuming

24

the Court agrees with any of my grounds for the

25

dismissal , that it dismisses the matter that would be

26

the end of that risk -- that heari n g under 29-38c is

27

done unless the state appeals .

But besides that , if

24

the Court denies the motion , is it my understanding

that the state should be prepared sometime during

that same day to go forward even if it ' s an hour or

two later ?

on call , so that I should block off that entire day .

In other words, it should have witnesses

THE COURT :

Well , that ' 5 a fair ...well ,

I hadn ' t

really thought -- I hadn ' t thought about it .

long do you see the arguments going?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

10
11

How

Well , the argument , less

than
THE COURT :

Well , I mean , I see the -- when we

12

start at eleven o ' clock on the 9 th , you ' ll maybe add

13

some substance to this , I guess .

14

the documents and reviewed any filings of the state .

15

r mean , do you see the hearing taking more than ... !

16

mean , do you want to do it the next day?

17

what ' s your schedule on 10/10 or the following

18

Monday -- oh , no , the Monday is the holiday .

19

I think , is the holiday .

20

could do the hearing on 10/10 .

21

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

I ' ll have reviewed

I mean ,

Monday ,

10 / 10 isn ' t t hat busy , we

Well , again , subject to my

22

objection to any continuance though I ' m available on

23

the 10 th .

24

THE COURT :

Well , why don ' t we do this , let ' s

25

have everybody reserve 10/10 as well , but , Mr .

26

Schoenhorn , it may we ll be as we get a little closer

27

if the issues are as clear as you suggest they might

25
1

be then maybe I ' ll have a better sense .

don ' t want to -- the witnesses -- the state

represents were here most of today in anticipation of

going for ward , if I can avoid having them sit here

all day on the 9 th only to learn that they needn ' t

have been here in the first place .

accommodate them to the extent I could and would your

witnesses as well if you care to call any .

don ' t we , for the time being , keep the loth open as

mean , I

I would certainly

So why

10

well , but maybe as we get closer to the 9 th we ' ll

11

have a better idea .

12

All right .

13

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

14

THE COURT :

15

ATTY . HANS :

Now , what about your other areas?

I ' m sorry .

Ms . Hans has a

Yes .
Your Honor , just before we leave

16

the risk issue I just want to put the defendant on

17

notice and just let the Court know that , you know ,

18

there is in Taupier v . Taupier , the civil case , we

19

believe there was an agreement the guns should have

20

already been turned over and they ' re also anticipated

21

to be seized as evidence in the threatening case , so

22

even if you make the finding that there ' s no imminent

23

threat and order the release of them there are other

24

avenues in which these firearms are held .

25

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

I think in chambers we had

26

this discussion .

There ' s no question that there are

27

other orders currently in place that wo uld not --

26
1

would preclude the weapons going back at this time to

my client .

a civil suit has been filed that seeks certain relief

and I ' m entitled to challenge that and fight it

along -- you know , the choice is whether to do that

and that was the state ' s not mine , so .

The issue is a procedure has been filed ,

THE COURT :

Well , Ms . Hans , I mean , my initial

impression is in accord with that just stated by Mr.

Schoenhorn , that it would seem that there is an

10

action pending which requires adjudication .

11

not wo rk any immediate pract ical relief with regard

12

to the items seized , but to the extent that the 29 -

13

38c process has collateral consequences , thos e

14

consequences need to be the subject of a hearing

15

before they could be allowed to occur .

16

suspect -- I mean , the re ' d be one -- the state could

17

withdraw and just determine it's going to hold the

18

\veapons under what Mr . 5choenhorn says, may be other

19

ways, but then the state would lose any right to seek

20

other relief under 29-38c .

21

I can ' t , I don't think , say , well , I ' m not going to

22

rule on this because you ' re not getting the guns back

23

anyway.

24
25

ATTY . HANS :

It may

So I

But as it goes right now

I understand , Your Honor .

just

wanted to alert the Court.

26

THE COURT :

All right .

27

So , Mr . 5choenhorn , what else did you want to be

27
1

heard on with regard to now the criminal case , which

is the threatening file , the docket number of which

is CR - 14-675616 , it charges threatening first ,

harassment second .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Okay .

A couple of things .

And this has to do with the conditions that the court

had imposed that might have had collateral

consequences that were not necessarily contemplated

during the orders , and aside from the two separate

10

large cash bonds that had to be imposed and then

11

there were conditions imposed in Hartford , over

12

severa l days and coming up with additional arguments ,

13

then the case is transferred here .

14

there ' s one thing that can be resolved quickly .

15

want to make sure in light of the fact that my

16

that Mr . Taupier was not allowed to come to my office

17

to meet with me , that that is clearly now the Court

18

will make clear on the record that he has the right ,

19

you know , and he can discuss it with CSSD , obviously ,

20

and let them know when he has those appointments , but

21

he has the right , subject to notifying them , to come

22

to meetings at my office .

23

24

THE COURT :

27

(Pause)
THE COURT :

What are the orders - - may I see the

threatening file , please?

25
26

I believe that

Did the defendant first appear

before Judge Alexander on 9/ 2 on the threatening

28

1
2

charge , am I looking at the right ...

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

He was held on a cash bond

that was posted -- that was ordered in the warrant

itself by Judge Mullarkey , but he was released over

the weekend and given a court date which he was

subsequently telephoned to come in before the date

that had been assigned .

8
9

THE COURT :

So did he shoH up the day after

Labor Day ?

10

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Yes , he did .

11

THE COURT :

That ' s 9/2 .

12

Okay .

bond was increased then?

13

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

14

THE COURT :

15

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

16

THE COURT :

17

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

18

THE COURT :

19

AT TY. SCHOENHORN :

20

21

And then the

To -- by - - yes .

By Judge Alexander .
To $75 , 000 cash .

Increased by 40?
40 more , right .

Right .

Right .

Which was posted , I guess ,

that night .
THE COURT :

Al l right .

Well , then there ' s an

22

issue that needs to be addressed because one of the

23

orders of Judge Alexander is that the defendant must

24

stay 1 , 000 feet away from Judge Bozzuto .

25

ATTY . HANS :

26

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

27

In family , Your Honor .

Right .

I haven ' t measured

the distance from the family court to my office , but

29
1

it ' s -- if it ' s not 1 , 000 feet it ' s close to that .

My office is hear -- it ' s right behind the criminal

court on Lafayette Street then you -- so you have

that entire parking lot , however wide that is , then

you have Lafayette Street , you have the --

6
7

8
9

THE COURT :

I know where your office is .

And

frankly I don ' t know where Judge Bozzuto sits , but

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

We ll , family court is over on

90 or 80 Washington , it ' s one of those next to the

10

state police barracks on Washington Street .

11

don ' t know where her chambers is in relation to that

12

building as we ll .

13

THE COURT :

14

ATTY . HANS :

And I

So what ' s the state ' s position on -Your Honor , I ' m just very concerned

15

about it given the nature of the threats .

16

the judge ' s order -- Judge Alexander ' s order was very

17

explicit , stay 1 , 000 feet away from Judge Bozzuto and

18

her family .

19

where she \vorks daily Monday through Friday I have

20

some , I have some real concerns about it .

21

I mean ,

Given the proximity of his office to

THE COURT :

I mean , Judge Alexander further

22

ordered -- oh , did the defendant then return to court

23

on the Wednesday?

24

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

25

THE COURT :

26

27

Yes .

So he was there and then when he

returned on Wednesday - ATTY . HANS ;

Tuesday and Wednesday , 9 / 2 , 9/3 .

30

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

So the judge had

On Wednesday there were further

conditions that prohibited the defendant from the

town of residence of Judge Bozzuto .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Right .

Which isn ' t Hartford

or Cromwell , so.

THE COURT :

I suspect it was certainly the

intention - - well , what ' s the state ' s position on

this?

10

ATTY . HANS :

Your Honor , my position is that he

11

not be allowed to go to Mr . Schoenhorn office because

12

it is right adjacent to the family court , there ' s no

13

reason they can ' t meet at a neutral site that is not

14

in the close proximity to the judge .

15

be the state ' s position and I think that ' s complying

16

with the black letter of Judge Alexander ' s orders .

17

So I would - -

18

THE COURT :

So that would

Well , Judge Alexander ' s orders have

19

to be considered at least giving due deference to the

20

defendant ' s Sixth Amendment right as well , so I can ' t

21

be blind to the defendant ' s right to meet with Mr .

22

Schoenhorn .

23

ATTY . HANS :

And no one ' s saying that , Your

24

Honor .

He has a Sixth Amendment right to counsel and

25

he can certainly meet at a location that ' s convenient

26

to both he and his attorney ,

27

Street , which is in very close proximity to the

just not at the 108 Oak

31

family court .
THE COURT :

Well , I ' m not in a position to

determine whether or not your office within 1 , 000

feet or not .

proximity , but I have no idea if it ' s a quarter of a

mile away or more or less , it ' s a little less than , I

guess , a quarter of a mile , 1 , 000 yards .

1 , 000 feet or 1 , 000 yards?

9
10

I mean , it ' s in relative close

ATTY . HANS :

Or it is

A thousand feet .

Feet .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

I think it may be more than

11

that because then we ' re talking about my office isn ' t

12

in my parking lot , which is behind my building and

13

THE COURT :

But you know what , this is not

14

the -- Mr . Schoenhorn , let me ask you this

15

question --

16

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

There ' s no reason my client

17

needs to go in front of or behind the family court

18

building .

19

circuitous route to get to my office , my office is on

20

a one-way street and then as you leave there you get

21

to -- directly to I-84 .

22

Cromwe ll , require that he take Route 9 up to 84 and

23

get off at the Capitol Avenue exit and come down Oak

24

Street and go around the block that way, so then he

25

never has to be near the family court except that

26

there ' s also the issue the case has not yet been

27

transferred .

So to the extent that he has to make a

I could -- since he lives in

Attorney Mathers pointed out that his

32
1

family matter isn ' t -THE COURT :

When is that case down next?

(Pause)
ATTY .

SCHOENHORN :

The 16 th I

but I

know that a

motion has been filed \vith Judge Sim6n to transfer it

here , but if it needs your

THE COURT :

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

By Attorney Mathers?
By Attorney Mathers , and I

got a text that she didn ' t knOH whether it requires

10

your approval as the administrative family judge for

11

this court , but it would certainly be my client ' s

12

request that it be allowed to corne here if that ' s

13

what Judge Simon orders , because that would be the

14

same building .

15

THE COURT :

All right .

But as it stands now the

16

defendant has been ordered to appear before Judge

17

Sim6n in Hartford on the 16 t h ?

18

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

19

hearing is the 16 t h

20

THE COURT :

21

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Well , his next date for his

Right .
But that conflicts with

22

Judge -- with the pending order regarding staying

23

aHay from Judge Bozzuto .

24

from the family court , so that depends on whether

25

Judge Bozzuto ' s even working that day , which is of

26

course that ' s a problem .

27

THE COURT :

It doesn ' t say stay away

All right .

Let me ask you a

33

question , Mr . Schoenhorn , do you have any

intention -- I ' m asking you as an officer of the

court -- to be meeting with Mr . Taupier before Monday

the 15 th ?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

No , not before Monday .

Then here ' s what I would ask , I see

the issue but I do think that this all

like to call to find out if the family case is being

transferred here .

I would

I would like to issue one order .

10

I will not deprive Mr . Taupier of his right to see

11

you , if you ' re not going to be seeing Mr . Taupier

12

before Monday then I will issue an order on Monday

13

and you can contact the clerk ' s office and it would

14

enable you to see Mr . Taupier as soon as Tuesday if

15

you wish to .

16

certainly able to see Mr . Taupier in any other

17

location .

18

I am reluctant to impose -- and you ' re

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

That ' s correct , but in terms

19

of my computer access and this is a computer case and

20

so there ' s --

21

THE COURT :

There is -- you ' re not deprived from

22

going to another location , but there is an order that

23

prohibits you and it may well be that your office is

24

within that area , as I suspect going to the family

25

court would be .

26

27

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Well , that ' s why I ' m asking

for a modification of that order and

34

THE COURT :

Right .

So I have to see -- and I

want to issue one order .

issue come up again on Tuesday , so .

Taupier if you wish to before that date , but I ' m

going to prohibit Mr . Taupier from being at your

office until further order of the court which will be

issued on Monday the 15 th

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

10

I don ' t want to have this

You may see Mr .

Okay .

What else?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

The second issue is , again ,

11

it was asked by Attorney Mathers for me to mention it

12

to the Court , there is the issue of Judge Sim6n --

13

there was -- before this there was equal parenting of

14

these children , they lived half the time with my

15

client, half the time with the wife .

16

of this Court ' s order , not Judge Alexander ' s order ,

17

because it ' s a 24-hour otherwise lockdown , there

18

isn ' t an exception for even going to the court

19

authorization , supervised visitation location , which

20

I understand is in Vernon .

21

THE COURT :

22

ATTY . HANS :

23

THE COURT :

24

Right .

Now as a result

I heard Rockvi lle .

Kid Safe .
That was what Attorney Mather said

earlier this week .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

25

26

note .

27

Honor ' s ruling on that .

Right .

And I did read the

I mean , there ' s a length y notation of Your

I ' m asking that that be

35

modified that , again , as long as CSSD specifically

confirms the time and whatnot of those appointments

that he be allowed to see his children .

He hasn ' t

been able to see his children since the

well ,

certainly since his arraignment , so that ' s now

been

THE COURT :

I understood I was only - - there was

one meeting that was , I think , scheduled for

yesterday.

The only visit that I was aware of that

10

the defendant would have been having with his

11

children was Wednesday supervised visitation in

12

Rockville .

13

and the parties will be back in court on Thursday .

14

So tha t was --

And I said that I'm not going to permit

15

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

16

THE COURT :

17

18

And now here we are .

And here we are .

Okay .

So when is

your client next to see his children?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

He was supposed to have

but

19

\Veekend visitation , but because -- Saturday

20

now that because he was unable to get -- go to this

21

hearing with Judge Simon I ' m not sure and nor does he

22

know what the current status of that is because Judge

23

Simon , obviously when he said you have this meeting

24

in Rockville and we ' ll go from there , but the court

25

said he can ' t go there so I don ' t

26

that question .

27

THE COURT :

know the answer to

Well , what ' s the state ' s position on

36

what the order should be as we go forward here?

may not -- other than the order which I ' ll issue on

Monday concerning Judge Bozzuto ...

ATTY . HANS :

We

Your Honor , my concern is this , I

know if the Court is in receipt of the

don ' t

intensive pre-trial supervision progress report dated

today ,

9/11/14 .

THE COURT :

ATTY . HANS :

10

I ' m not .
Just ask that you take a minute to

review it and ...

(Pause)

11

12

ATTY . HANS :

And , Your Honor , because there was

13

more or less zero tolerance issued regarding his use

14

of electronic monitoring bracelet and it appears from

15

the progress report that he has violated that .

16

Again , I have grave concerns about him leaving to go

17

to the Kid Safe program in Vernon to visit his

18

children when it ' s clear that he ' s , in the state ' s

19

position , it appears that he is testing this device ,

20

determining whether or not he can go under the radar .

21

So I have some real concerns about -- and in the

22

progress report ' s opinion violating the zero

23

tolerance that the court very expressly and

24

explicitly set out .

25

THE COURT :

26

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

27

hearing on that issue .

Mr . Sc hoen horn .

Yes .

I would like to have a

37
1

THE COURT :

All right .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

doesn ' t have a timer on it .

tethered -- he cannot move physically for two hours ,

there ' s a six to eight foot cord , if he moves it

disconnects .

the order was

been given so you have to sit for an hour to record

it , so the fact that they today , today made him sign

First of all , the device

He sits for -- and he ' s

So I would submit that , first of all ,

the 2014 instructions is what he had

10

a 2012, that is a two and a half year old

11

instructions , that say you have to sit for t\vO hours

12

twice a day , that means for four hours a day he

13

cannot -- he has to sit by a \.JaI l tethered to a short

14

cord and document and it he moves at all it

15

disconnects .

So I would submit that that is now --

16

THE COURT :

So do we need a hearing on this?

17

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

So the claim is that -- the

18

c laim is he was a minute and maybe 50 seconds short

19

of two hours , that ' s the c laim of non-compliance and

20

I submit that not only -- and he has to do that twice

21

a day

22

don ' t even require that of people in solitary

23

confinement at Northern Correctional .

24

submit that he ' s looking at a wall clock and it ' s an

25

analog clock and who knows , he doesn ' t know , it

26

doesn ' t beep , it doesn ' t tell him exactly when two

27

hours , so I stand here to have her argue that he ' s

not on l y to have to sit and not move , they

So I would

38

testing the court because he was a minute -- because

the machine said it was a minute and 50 seconds short

or two hours that he actually then moved and

therefore it disconnected .
THE COURT :

All right .

Well , we ' re going to

need a hearing , I guess , on the adequacy of the

charging .

charging requirements are to make sure the device

continues to work properly .

I have to hear evidence on what the

I can't make any

10

findings on this .

11

to introduce evidence that the charging is completed

12

in less than two hours .

13

the Court worked under the evidence it had earlier

14

this week that it required two hour continuous

15

charging .

16

to what ' s required .

17

you know what , this will also -- I ' m going to order

18

the parties to come back , we can have the hearing on

19

Monday .

22

The state has claimed and

I ' m not in a position to make a finding as

So I think we ' re going to -- and

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

20
21

Mr . Schoenhorn apparently is going

I have jury selection on that

day .

THE COURT :

Oh , you ' re starting on Monday .

So

23

Hhen are we gOing to do the hearing?

24

tomorrow , I just do not have any opportunity , there ' s

25

108 cases down .

26

27

Do you ...

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :
from the trial .

I don ' t have

I ' m off the following week

In other words , we ' re picking a jury

39
1

then we have a week off .

THE COURT :

Okay .

So the 22 nd is a Monday .

Well , but the only thing is , Mr . Schoenhorn , and the

reason I said do it Monday , I am not inclined to

relieve or to modify any of the more stringent

conditions that I put in place earlier this week

unless I ' m persuaded that this device is being

handled properly or charged properly .

So I ' m ready

to do the hearing as early as Monday .

If you want it

10

to be the following Monday then I ' m going to leave

11

all the orders that I entered earlier this week in

12

place until Monday the 22 nd at which time we can have

13

a hearing on this device and decide wher e we go from

14

here .

15

15 th to see whether or not - - the order I ' ll issue on

16

the 15 th , which you can obtain from the clerk , will

17

be to establish ground rules by which Mr . Taupier can

18

come to your office .

I will still issue the order , though , on the

19

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

20

THE COURT :

Right .

And then on the 22 nd I will be

21

available to

which is your first day available

22

after Monda y

to hear evidence on the charging .

23

And , aga i n , I would urge the parties to work with one

24

another to identify what really needs to be addressed

25

by the Court because I suspect I ' m going to need to

26

hear from the monitoring company to know

27

know what it says on some 2012 form or 2014 form ,

I don ' t

40

you ' re telling me they exist , I assume that they do .

The qu es t ion is , in my mind , what is necessary to

ensure that this GPS device produces the information

which it is placed on the defendant to provide .

that ' s what is going to be required .

And

So , Mr . Schoenhorn , with the exception of

issuing an ordering on Monday the 15 th concerning

your right to have your client come to your office , I

will reserve all my other rulings until the 22 nd ,

10
11

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

And I ' ll just note , the other

issue that I would raise , and I don ' t mean to keep --

12

THE COURT :

13

ATT Y. SCHOENHORN :

Yes .

It ' s 10 of 5 : 00 .
is the order by Judge

14

Alexander .

15

thought you had issued the order , but it was Judge

16

Alexander that requires my client to submit to --

I apologize , I think this morning I

17

THE COURT :

18

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Random searches of his person .

-- random searches of his

19

person, his home and his vehicle .

20

with all due respect , blatantly unconstitutional and

21

wou ld never be a reasonable order for bail

22

conditions , one does not - - certainly does not l ose

23

their Fourth Amendment rights because of conditions

24

of bail , especially if he ' s locked down there ' d be no

25

reason for anyone to come into his house and say

26

we ' re conducting a random search of your house or

27

your person and I would --

I be lieve that is ,

41

THE COURT :

Well , I don ' t know if the lockdown

issue is what ' s important because , I mean , certainly

others can deliver things to the defendant \.,rhich he

is not permitted to possess , so the right of

inspection might be to ensure that the defendant

hasn ' t come into possession of anything prohibitive ,

but the fact that he ' s locked down doesn ' t eliminate

entirely the possibility that there could be such a

violation , but we can address that as well on the

10
11

12
13

22 nd
ATTY . SCHOENHORN :
issue I

Right .

That ' s the other

intend to address .

THE COURT :

All right .

So we ' re going to

14

address on the 22 nd the charging , and I suggest that

15

there ' s efforts made by both sides to contact the

16

monitoring company to determine what ' s necessary .

17

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

18

shared this with

19

ATTY . HANS :

20

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

Right .

He did .

And I ' m actually -- I

Thank you , Your Honor .

Ms . Hans , so I ' m just

21

going to hand up and make it part of the record so

22

the Court is at least aware of what I ' m talking

23

about .

This is the --

24

THE COURT :

25

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

All right .

Marshal .

-- instructions that were

26

given from the monitoring company and it ' s July 2014

27

dated , so at least the Court is aware of that .

There

42
is one from 2012 that has different informatio n .

THE COURT :

And it ' s signed -- that ' s the one

that the defendant was

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

But that ' s the one that says two

hours?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

He signed it today , today _

That ' s right .

Do we know if the device is

do we

know if these instructions are pertinent to the

10

device -- which of either is pertinent to the device

11

with which the defendant has been equipped .

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

12
13

You would have to ask the

CSSD official who had him sign it today .

14

THE COURT :

All right .

Well , I suspect that

15

there will be efforts made by both sides to reach out

16

to the proper parties to make those determinations .

17

All right .

18

So , Mr . Schoenhorn , to summarize we will be

19

continuing the firearms hearing to October 9 th , with

20

the state ' s responsive pleadings or filings due no

21

later than September 30 th

22

court here on the conditions of the defendant ' s bond

23

on t h e 22 nd of September and on the 15 th of September .

24

25

which the defendant may see Mr . Schoenhorn at his

26

office .

27

or Oak?

We will also be back in

will issue an order setting forth the terms by

And your address , Me . Schoenhorn ,

is on Russ

43

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

108?

ATTY . SCHOENHORN :

THE COURT :

11

12

13
14
15
16

17

18
19

20
21
22
23
24

25
26
27

All right .

Does

that conclude today ' s business , Counsel?

ATTY . HANS :

10

Yes .

108 Oak Street .

Oak , 108 Oak Street .

Yes , sir .
Yes .

All right .

Yes , Your Honor .

I will see the parties

back here on Monday , September 22 nd .

Thank you .

Adjourn court .
(Proceedings end at 4 : 52 p . m. )

MMX-CR14-0675616T i MMX-CR13-0200821T

STATE OF CONNECTICUT

MMX-CVI4-54
SUPERIOR COURT
STATE OF CONNECTICUT

JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF
MIDDLESEX

v.

AT MIDDLETOWN ,
CONNECTICUT

EDWARD F . TAUPIER

SEPTEMBER 11 , 2014

C E R T I F I CAT ION

I hereby certify the foregoing pages are a true and

correct transcription of the audio recording of the abovereferenced case , heard in Superior Court , Judicial District of
Middlesex , Middletown , Connecticut , before the Honorable David P .
Gold , Judge , on the 11 th day of September 2014 .
Dated this 22 nd day of September 2014 in Midd letown ,
Connecticut.
'.

ilson v
Court Recording Monitor