## Facts

- Robert Courchesne was charged with capital felony for murdering two people, Demetris Rodgers and Antonia Rodgers, in the course of a single transaction under Conn. Gen. Stat. (Rev. to 1997) § 53a-54b(8).
- Courchesne waived a jury for the guilt phase and was tried before a three-judge panel, which found him guilty of the charged capital felony.
- At the penalty stage, the State sought to prove the statutory aggravating factor that “the defendant committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel or depraved manner” under Conn. Gen. Stat. (Rev. to 1997) § 53a-46a(i)(4).
- The State argued it could establish that aggravator by proving that at least one of the two murders was committed in the especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner.
- Courchesne argued the aggravator required proof that both murders were committed in that manner because the capital felony was defined by the killing of two persons.
- The trial court accepted Courchesne’s reading, dismissed the aggravator as legally insufficient on that theory, and thereby precluded a death-penalty hearing based on that aggravator.

## Issues

1. In a capital felony conviction for murdering two or more persons in a single transaction under § 53a-54b(8), must the State prove that both killings were “especially heinous, cruel or depraved” to establish the § 53a-46a(i)(4) aggravating factor, or is proof as to one victim sufficient?

## Decision

- The Connecticut Supreme Court reversed the trial court.
- The court held the State need not prove both murders were committed in an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner to establish § 53a-46a(i)(4).
- Proof that at least one of the murders was committed in the specified aggravated manner is sufficient.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with that interpretation.

## Legal Principles

- In a multiple-victim capital felony under § 53a-54b(8), the § 53a-46a(i)(4) aggravating factor may be established by showing the manner of at least one killing was especially heinous, cruel, or depraved.
- Connecticut’s capital scheme treats the capital felony conviction as establishing death-penalty eligibility, while aggravating factors serve a separate role in determining whether the death penalty may be imposed in the particular case after considering mitigation.
- Statutory interpretation may consider text, context, structure, legislative history, and purpose without requiring a prior finding of textual ambiguity.

## Conclusion

The court held that, for a two-victim capital felony, the “especially heinous, cruel or depraved” aggravator does not require proof that both killings met that standard; establishing the aggravator as to one victim is enough, and the dismissal of the aggravator was reversed and remanded.


State v. Courchesne, 262 Conn. 537, 816 A.2d 562 (Conn. 2003)