As of September 5, 2022, Freedom of Information Commission meetings and contested case hearings will resume being conducted in person. All parties and witnesses must appear in person for their contested case hearings and Commission meetings. Please access this link or contact the Commission for further information.

Final Decision FIC2014-861
In the Matter of a Complaint by
FINAL DECISION
Umar Shahid,
     Complainant
     against
Docket #FIC 2014-861
State of Connecticut, Department of
Correction, Parole and Community
Services Division, New Haven District
Office,
     Respondents
September 9, 2015

     The above-captioned matter was scheduled to be heard as a contested case on July 6, 2015. The complainant, who is incarcerated, appeared via teleconference, pursuant to the January 2004 memorandum of understanding between the Commission and the Department of Correction.  See Docket No. CV 03-0826293, Anthony Sinchak v. FOIC et al, Superior Court, J.D. of Hartford at Hartford, Corrected Order dated January 27, 2004 (Sheldon, J.).   
     The respondents appeared, represented by counsel.  Three witnesses for the respondents were present and ready to proceed.
     At the outset of the hearing, the complainant informed the hearing officer that he was ready to proceed.  After the hearing was opened, but before any evidence was entered into the record, the complainant stated that he did not consent to the hearing going forward.  The complainant demanded that the hearing officer recuse herself, claiming bias because she had granted the respondents’ continuance in this matter on June 2, 2015, and the complainant had not received notice of the respondents’ motion for continuance.  When the hearing officer declined to recuse herself, the complainant began to argue with the hearing officer about the propriety of the continuance granted on June 2, 2015.  The hearing officer acknowledged the complainant’s objection and warned the complainant that if he did not proceed with the hearing, then the hearing officer would close the hearing and dismiss the case for lack of prosecution.  The complainant repeated that he did not consent to the hearing going forward.  The hearing officer then closed the hearing.
     The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:
     1.  The complaint is dismissed.

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of September 9, 2015.
__________________________
Cynthia A. Cannata
Acting Clerk of the Commission


PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S., THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:
Umar Shahid # 103589
Carl Robinson Correctional Institution
285 Shaker Road
Enfield, CT  06082
State of Connecticut, Department of Correction, Parole and
Community Services Division, New Haven District Office
c/o James Neil, Esq.
24 Wolcott Hill Road
Wethersfield, CT  06109
and
Steven R. Strom, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General
State of Connecticut,
Office of the Attorney General
110 Sherman Street
Hartford, CT  06105
____________________________
Cynthia A. Cannata
Acting Clerk of the Commission

FIC/2014-861/FD/cac/9/9/2015