 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Morales v. Comm'r of Corr., AC 28341,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, May 20, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of an inmate's habeas petition was proper because the inmate failed to prove his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, his guilty plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, and there was no evidence that, had the inmate taken his case to trial, he would have been acquitted of the offenses to which he pled guilty.
|
|||||
| Novak v. Levin, SC 17857, SC 17858,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, May 20, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The appellate court was acting within its jurisdiction and the proper exercise of its discretion when it granted a patient's untimely motions for reconsideration as the time period provided in Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. App. P. ¿ 71-5 was not jurisdictional and the patient's noncompliance with its orders was based on an honest mistake.
|
|||||
| State v. Clark, AC 28371,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, May 20, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A seizure was not based on a reasonable and articulable suspicion under the Fourth Amendment and Conn. Const. art. I, ¿ 7. An informant did not indicate that he had observed any illegal activity or show any knowledge of defendant's future behavior, and officers did not witness any illegal activity before stopping defendant.
|
|||||
| State v. Denya, AC 27540,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, May 20, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the superior court abused its discretion by modifying an earlier probation order and requiring defendant to submit to electronic monitoring continuously for the duration of his probation absent any showing of good cause, in violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 53a-30(c), said modification was reversed.
|
|||||
| State v. One Or More Persons over Whom the Court's Jurisdiction Has Not Yet Been Invoked, AC 29117,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, May 20, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Buyer's writ of error to review a trial court's decision denying his motion for return of andirons bought at an auction and seized by police was improper because the buyer was a party to the underlying action, and thus, the buyer had a statutory right to appeal from the trial court's decision under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 52-263.
|
|||||
| State v. Petaway, AC 27088,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, May 20, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Claim that judge who presided over Garvin agreement plea should not have presided over motion to withdraw plea had no basis and judge's conduct did not show bias under Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. ¿ 1-22(a) and Conn. Code Jud. Conduct Canon 3(c)(1). Plea withdrawal was not warranted under Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. ¿ 39-27.
|
|||||
| State v. Smith, AC 28708,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, May 20, 2008, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's statement, after waiving his Miranda rights, that he would only speak with a state's attorney who could give him a deal in a murder investigation, was a conditional statement that did not invoke his right to remain silent and as the statement could be viewed as inculpatory, it was properly admitted during defendant's murder trial.
|
|||||
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. |
