State v. Slimskey, 761 A.2d 764 (Conn. 2000). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Slimskey, 761 A.2d 764 (Conn. 2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
33 citation events (33 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Daniel B. (conn, 2019-03-05)
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" State v. Daniel B.
Conn. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
I do not suggest that the payment of money is a necessary prerequisite in all murder-for-hire cases; see State v. Servello, 59 Conn. App. 362 , 373 and n.4, 757 A.2d 36 , cert. denied, 254 Conn. 940 , 761 A.2d 764 (2000); but I believe that the act of making payment in this case, on this record, became the only reliable indicator of the defendant’s actual intentions during the crucial time period at issue.
discussed Cited "see" State v. Daniel B. (2×)
Conn. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
I do not suggest that the payment of money is a necessary prerequisite in all murder-for-hire cases; see State v. Servello , 59 Conn. App. 362 , 373 and n.4, 757 A.2d 36 , cert. denied, 254 Conn. 940 , 761 A.2d 764 (2000) ; but I believe that the act of making payment in this case, on this record, **45 became the only reliable indicator of the defendant's actual intentions during the crucial time period at issue.
cited Cited "see" State v. Juarez
Conn. App. Ct. · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Servello , 59 Conn. App. 362 , 373, 757 A.2d 36 , cert. denied, 254 Conn. 940 , 761 A.2d 764 (2000).
cited Cited "see" State v. Daniel B.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Servello, 59 Conn. App. 362, 372 , 757 A.2d 36 , cert. denied, 254 Conn. 940 , 761 A.2d 764 (2000).
cited Cited "see" State v. Mann
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Newton, 59 Conn. App. 507, 513-14 , 757 A.2d 1140 , cert. denied, 254 Conn. 936 , 761 A.2d 764 (2000).
cited Cited "see" Servello v. Commissioner of Correction
Conn. App. Ct. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Servello, 59 Conn. App. 362 , 757 A.2d 36 , cert. denied, 254 Conn. 940 , 761 A.2d 764 (2000).
cited Cited "see" State v. O'neil
Conn. App. Ct. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Servello, 59 Conn. App. 362, 372 , 757 A.2d 36 , cert, denied, 254 Conn. 940 , 761 A.2d 764 (2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Hunter
Conn. App. Ct. · 2001 · signal: see also · confidence low
In determining whether a defendant’s right of cross-examination has been unduly restricted, we consider the nature of the excluded inquiry, whether the field of inquiry was adequately covered by other questions that were allowed, and the overall quality of the cross-examination viewed in relation to the issues actually litigated at trial. . . . [T]he denial of all meaningful cross-examination into a legitimate area of inquiry fails to comport with constitutional standards under the confrontation clause.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Jones, 60 Conn. App. 8…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
v.
CHARLES SLIMSKEY
SC 16411.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Oct 25, 2000.
761 A.2d 764
Donald G. Leis, Jr., in support of the petition., Timothy J. Sugrue, senior assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

No opinion found.Click here to view source material.