 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Simms v. Chaisson, (SC 17409),
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 21, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding substantial attorney's fees to home owners under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-571c(b) where they recovered only nominal damages against their neighbors due to the allegedly racially motivated harassment by the neighbors; the holding of Farrar was not applicable in making the fee determination.
|
|||||
| Slowick v. Morgan Stanley & Co., CV054003860,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, February 21, 2006, Decided , February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Co-worker's motions to strike a worker's claim of invasion of privacy was denied, as the worker presented a legally sufficient claim of invasion of privacy based on acts of harassment by the co-worker, and the invasion of privacy count was properly joined with the remainder of the action, which alleged sexual discrimination.
|
|||||
| State v. Aviles, SC 17055,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 21, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions for murder and criminal possession of a pistol or revolver were proper under U.S. Const. amends. IV and XIV, and Conn. Const. art. I, § 7 where the police had probable cause to believe that defendant had recently killed a person, and that the murder weapon had not been recovered.
|
|||||
| State v. Bermudez, AC 24900,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, February 21, 2006, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant who had not pled guilty to subsequent offenses could appeal the violation of her probation as well as the subsequent convictions themselves, evidence that robbery victim recognized defendant's voice and that stolen items were found in defendant's home was sufficient to support revocation.
|
|||||
| State v. Camacho, CR02212050,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, GEOGRAPHICAL AREA 7 AT MERIDEN, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant was on probation at the time of a burglary/robbery incident, imposition of the unexecuted portion of the underlying sentence was neither inappropriate nor disproportionate; the sentencing court's actions accorded with the parameters of Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. § 43-23 et seq., and Conn. Gen. Stat. § 51-194 et seq.
|
|||||
| State v. Figueroa, CR98472663,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's 60-year sentence on a murder conviction was affirmed on review. Based on the record as a whole, the sentencing court's actions were in accordance with the parameters of Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. § 43-23 et seq., and considering the egregious nature of the crime, the sentence was neither inappropriate nor disproportionate.
|
|||||
| State v. Goriss, CR04224417,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentence for Risk of Injury to a Minor, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-21(a)(2), was affirmed; considering the nature of the offense and petitioner's unwillingness to admit responsibility, the sentence was neither inappropriate nor disproportionate. The sentencing court's actions were in accordance with Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. § 43-23 et seq.
|
|||||
| State v. Hedge, CR03187596,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF FAIRFIELD, AT BRIDGEPORT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where inmate was sentenced to 23 years for narcotics possession with intent to sell and intent to sell within 1,500 feet of school, sentence was not inappropriate or disproportionate under Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. § 43-23 et seq. and Conn. Gen. Stat. § 51-194 et seq. He had long criminal history and always violated parole and probation.
|
|||||
| State v. Hines, CR01501702, CR97450016, CR98462659,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentence was within parameters of Conn. Gen. Prac. Book, R. Super. Ct. § 43-23 et seq.; 22 year sentence for first degree assault with firearm in violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-59(a)(5) was proper where it was committed while petitioner was on two probation and he had extensive criminal history that included assaults and weapon charges.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
