## Facts

- In the early morning of May 21, 2000, a large crowd gathered at the Live Wire Club in New Haven.
- After the club opened, an officer heard a loud sound from inside; patrons ran out stating someone had been shot.
- Efraim Gilliard was found on the dance floor with a gunshot wound above his right eye and later died.
- Evidence showed Steven Gary was punched in the face by Jemar Sanders during an altercation.
- Gary turned toward Sanders and fired a loaded pistol; the shot struck and killed Gilliard instead of Sanders.
- The state prosecuted the homicide as intentional murder based on transferred intent (intent to kill Sanders transferred to Gilliard).
- A jury convicted Gary of murder and two firearms offenses; the court accepted the verdict and polled the jurors in open court.
- After the verdict, one juror expressed doubts about the murder conviction; Gary moved for a mistrial and requested an evidentiary hearing for possible juror misconduct, both of which were denied.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence permitted a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Gary had the specific intent to kill required for murder, where the intended target was Sanders but the victim was Gilliard.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying a mistrial based on a juror’s post-verdict expression of doubt, allegedly calling unanimity into question.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying an evidentiary hearing on alleged juror misconduct based on the juror’s post-verdict statement.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Connecticut affirmed the murder conviction.
- The evidence was sufficient for the jury to infer specific intent to kill from the circumstances, including Gary’s deliberate firing of a handgun immediately after being punched and in the direction of Sanders.
- The fact that the bullet killed Gilliard rather than Sanders supported conviction through transferred intent and did not negate intent.
- The trial court properly denied a mistrial because a juror’s later doubts did not impeach a verdict that was accepted and confirmed by polling.
- The trial court properly denied an evidentiary hearing because the juror’s statement reflected internal deliberative processes rather than any external influence or improper contact.

## Legal Principles

- In a sufficiency review, the evidence is construed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict; the question is whether the jury reasonably could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Specific intent to kill may be inferred from circumstantial evidence, including the weapon used, the manner of use, the nature of the wound, and events surrounding the shooting.
- Under transferred intent, intent to kill one person satisfies the intent element of murder when another person is killed instead.
- After a verdict is accepted and the jury is discharged, juror second thoughts or doubts about the correctness of the verdict do not impeach unanimity and do not justify a mistrial.
- A juror-misconduct hearing generally requires a threshold showing of external influence or extraneous information; allegations limited to internal deliberations are insufficient.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the murder conviction because the jury could infer an intent to kill from Gary’s deliberate firing at his adversary, with intent transferring to the unintended victim, and because post-verdict juror doubts concerned internal deliberations that could not invalidate the accepted unanimous verdict or justify a misconduct hearing.


State v. Gary, 273 Conn. 393, 869 A.2d 1236 (Conn. 2005)