 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| State v. Stephen G., AC 28232,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 14, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As the trial court record in defendant's criminal matter did not contain a waiver of his right to a jury trial, a remand for a new trial was mandated; there was sufficient evidence of sexual contact between defendant and the victim to support his sexual assault conviction under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-72a(a)(1)(a).
|
|||||
| Toles v. Comm'r of Corr., AC 28985,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 14, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if a court assumed arguendo that counsel's failure to interview potential witnesses failed the performance prong of Strickland, the prisoner failed to show that the potential witnesses would have provided information that would have caused him not to enter the plea. Thus, his petition for a writ of habeas corpus was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Williams v. Comm'r of Corr., AC 28983,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, April 14, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Though transcript of inmate's guilty plea was unavailable, he was not entitled to a new trial, as habeas court did not err in implicitly finding that the record was reconstructed adequately on the basis of the testimony of the prosecutor and inmate's trial counsel and the habeas court's negative credibility determination of the inmate's testimony.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
