In Re Jermaine, 875 A.2d 43 (Conn. 2005). · Go Syfert
In Re Jermaine, 875 A.2d 43 (Conn. 2005). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
59 citation events (59 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Garcia v. City of Hartford (conn, 2009-06-30)
Treatment trajectory · 2005 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2005 2015 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 16 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Garcia v. City of Hartford
Conn. · 2009 · confidence medium
Id., 107.
cited Cited "see" Foote v. Commissioner of Correction
Conn. App. Ct. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Foote , 85 Conn.App. 356 , 360, 857 A.2d 406 (2004) (affirming petitioner's conviction), cert. denied, 273 Conn. 937 , 875 A.2d 43 , 44 (2005).
discussed Cited "see" In re Larry D.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Jermaine S. , 86 Conn.App. 819 , 822 n.4, 863 A.2d 720 ("[w]e may affirm the court's decision if we find that it properly concluded that any one of the statutory circumstances [under § 17a-112(j)(3) ] existed" [internal quotation marks omitted] ), cert. denied, 273 Conn. 938 , 875 A.2d 43 (2005).
discussed Cited "see" In Re Katia M.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2010 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord In re Jermaine S., 86 Conn. App. 819, 838-39 , 863 A.2d 720 , cert. denied, 273 Conn. 938 , 875 A.2d 43 (2005). m The respondent’s third claim is that the court’s finding that he had failed to achieve sufficient personal rehabilitation within the meaning of § 17a-112 (j) (3) (B) (i) was clearly erroneous.
discussed Cited "see" Fish v. Fish (2×)
Conn. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Jermaine S., 86 Conn. App. 819, 831 , 863 A.2d 720 , cert. denied, 273 Conn. 938 , 875 A.2d 43 (2005).
cited Cited "see" State v. Collins
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See Edwards v. Commissioner of Correction, 88 Conn. App. 169, 176 , 868 A.2d 125 , cert. denied, 273 Conn. 941 , 875 A.2d 43 (2005).
cited Cited "see" In re Nasia B.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Jermaine S., 86 Conn. App. 819, 827 , 863 A.2d 720 , cert. denied, 273 Conn. 938 , 875 A.2d 43 (2005).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Pompei
Conn. · 2021 · signal: see also · confidence low
Under these circum- stances, ‘‘[w]here there [was] no indication that a search for evidence of a crime was being made . . . [and] . . . [w]here a search is conducted as a service to an individual . . . evidence of a crime accidentally dis- covered need not be suppressed.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Id.; see also State v. Foote, 85 Conn. App. 356, 362 , 857 A.2d 406 (2004) (holding that officer who seized disabled vehicle on side of road initially ‘‘was not engaged in an investiga- tory stop of criminal activity, but rather was acting in accordance with h…
cited Cited "see, e.g." In re Aisjaha N.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2020 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., In re Jermaine S., 86 Conn. App. 819 , 828 n.7, 863 A.2d 720 , cert. denied, 273 Conn. 938 , 875 A.2d 43 (2005).
cited Cited "see, e.g." In re Aisjaha N.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2020 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., In re Jermaine S., 86 Conn. App. 819 , 828 n.7, 863 A.2d 720 , cert. denied, 273 Conn. 938 , 875 A.2d 43 (2005).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Doyle
Conn. App. Ct. · 2012 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., State v. Foote, 85 Conn. App. 356, 361 , 857 A.2d 406 (2004) (distinguishing community caretaking functions of local police officers, such as assisting motorists, from “detection, investigation, or acquisition of evidence relating to the violation of a criminal statute” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 273 Conn. 937 , 875 A.2d 43 , 44 (2005).
cited Cited "see, e.g." In Re Anvahnay S.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2011 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., In re Jermaine S., 86 *194 Conn. App. 819, 838, 863 A.2d 720 , cert. denied, 273 Conn. 938 , 875 A.2d 43 (2005).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Burroughs
Conn. · 2008 · signal: see also · confidence low
As the Appellate Court stated in State v. Lewis, supra, 60 Conn. App. 219 , “[i]f *853 [an officer is] constitutionally prohibited from investigating a dispatcher’s report regarding a suspicious car and making brief inquiries of its occupants, not only would it stifle basic police work and be inexplicably unprotective of the general public, but it . . . would greatly disserve the experience of sensible police officers in evaluating the totality of the circumstances, which must be taken into account.” Id., 243-44 ; see also State v. Foote, 85 Conn. App. 356, 361 , 857 A.2d 406 (2004) (dis…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Kaminski
Conn. App. Ct. · 2008 · signal: see also · confidence low
Where, however, the trial court has drawn conclusions of law, our review is plenary, and we must decide whether those conclusions are legally and logically correct in light of the findings of fact.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Nowell, 262 Conn. 686, 694 , 817 A.2d 76 (2003); see also State v. Foole, 85 Conn. App. 356, 360 , 857 A.2d 406 (2004), cert. denied, 273 Conn. 937 , 875 A.2d 43 , 44 (2005); State v. Carcare, 75 Conn. App. 756, 764 , 818 A.2d 53 (2003).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Jenkins (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see also · confidence low
Where, however, the trial court has drawn conclusions of law, our review is plenary, and we must decide whether those conclusions are legally and logically correct in light of the findings of fact." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Nowell, 262 Conn. 686, 694 , 817 A.2d 76 (2003); see also State v. Foote, 85 Conn. App. 356, 360 , 857 A.2d 406 (2004), cert. denied, 273 Conn. 937 , 875 A.2d 43 , 44 (2005); State v. Carcare, 75 Conn.App. 756, 764 , 818 A.2d 53 (2003).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Morris v. Cee Dee, LLC
Conn. App. Ct. · 2005 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., In re Jermaine S., 86 Conn. App. 819, 829 , 863 A.2d 720 , cert. denied, 273 Conn. 938 , 875 A.2d 43 (2005). 8 We do not disturb the judgment rendered by the court attaching the assets of the company. 9 On appeal, the individual defendant does not challenge the court’s finding that he had a duty to repair the grate. 10 We note that the company did not participate in the appeal on the basis of this claim, although that fact does not affect our decision.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In re JERMAINE S. et al.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
May 17, 2005.
875 A.2d 43
Published

Tiffany W., pro se, in support of the petition.

The petition by the respondent mother for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 86 Conn.App. 819, 863 A.2d 720 (2005), is denied.