We have in the past made pleas for lawyers to focus on the Connecticut Constitution. Let us here point out a reason for our plea that we have not given in the past: the Connecticut Constitution has a historical breadth unique among the constitutions of all 50 states, yet too many constitutional claims are being pursued solely under the U.S. Constitution even if there is a coordinate provision of the Connecticut Constitution that surely provides additional chances of success.

Two recent cases come to mind: State v. Patrick M., 344 Conn. 565, involving Miranda rights, and State v. Smith, 344 Conn. 229, involving a search warrant. Patrick M. happened to succeed and Smith happened to partially succeed under federal constitutional law. But that is not the point. The point is that neither defendant appears to have raised any issue under the Connecticut Constitution, even as a backup.