green
Positive treatment
8.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2007
2016
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Kerlyn T.
See State v. Smith, 100 Conn. App. 313, 324 , 917 A.2d 1017 (in determining whether defendant validly waived right to jury trial, court considered fact that defendant ‘‘had some familiarity with the court system, having a lengthy criminal history that included robberies’’), cert. denied, 282 Conn. 920 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Bumgarner-Ramos
See State v. Smith , 100 Conn. App. 313 , 320 n.6, 917 A.2d 1017 ("[a] party cannot preserve grounds for reversing a trial court decision by raising them for the first time in a postverdict motion" [internal quotation marks omitted] ), cert. denied, 282 Conn. 920 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007).
cited
Cited "see"
Nash v. Stevens
See Battalino v. Van Patten, 100 Conn. App. 155, 168 , 917 A.2d 595 , cert. denied, 282 Conn. 924 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Diaz
(2×)
See State v. Wells, 100 Conn. App. 337, 342 , 917 A.2d 1008 (noting this court’s deference to jury’s credibility determinations), cert. denied, 282 Conn. 919 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fennelly v. Norton
(2×)
See State v. Smith, 100 Conn.App. 313, 325 , 917 A.2d 1017 , cert. denied, 282 Conn. 920 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007). [6] Practice Book § 25-13(a) requires in relevant part that a motion to dismiss "shall always be filed with a supporting memorandum of law. . . ." [7] Pursuant to Practice Book § 25-8(b), Practice Book §§ 10-59, 10-60 and 10-61 "shall apply to family matters. . . ." [8] Peabody sought to amend its complaint by order of judicial authority, which is permitted under Practice Book § 10-60.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Scott
As this court previously has recognized, ‘‘[t]he fact that the defendant was represented by counsel and that he conferred with counsel concerning the right to waive his right to a jury trial supports a conclusion that his waiver was constitutionally sound.’’ State v. Tocco, supra, 120 Conn. App. 780 ; see also State v. Smith, 100 Conn. App. 313, 324 , 917 A.2d 1017 , cert. denied, 282 Conn. 920 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Jeremy D.
See, e.g., State v. Smith, 100 Conn. App. 313, 324 , 917 A.2d 1017 , cert. denied, 282 Conn. 920 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007); see also State v. Cobb, 251 Conn. 285, 373 , 743 A.2d 1 (1999) (“[although the presence of counsel does not by itself mean that the defendant’s interests and rights are protected . . . [t]he fact of counsel being present and having advised the defendant [concerning jury waiver] is a factor to be considered in determining the question of the need for or sufficiency of any admonition given by the court” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 841 , 12…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Tocco
See, e.g., State v. Smith, 100 Conn. App. 313, 324 , 917 A.2d 1017 , cert. denied, 282 Conn. 920 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Damato v. Murphy
(2×)
See also, e.g., State v. Wells, 100 Conn.App. 337, 343-44 , 917 A.2d 1008 , cert. denied, 282 Conn. 919 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007) (identifying the elements of attempt to commit assault).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Lewis
(6×)
See also State v. Pagan, 100 Conn. App. 671, 674-75 , 918 A.2d 1036 (defendant observed selling drugs), cert. denied, 282 Conn. 919 , 925 A.2d 1102 (2007); State v. Myers, 101 Conn. App. 167, 177-81 , 921 A.2d 640 (defendant’s transfer of drugs at location indicative of intent to sell at specific location), cert, granted on other grounds, 283 Conn. 906 , 927 A.2d 919 (2007); State v. Knight, 56 Conn. App. 845, 852 , 747 A.2d 13 (2000) (defendant showed marijuana and cocaine to plain clothed officer who had asked for a “ ‘ten’ ”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Damato
(2×)
Second, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intentionally does or omits to do anything which, under the circumstances as he believes them to be, is an act or omission constituting a substantial step in a course of conduct planned to culminate in his commission of the crime. . . . [T]he attempt is complete and punishable, when an act is done with intent to commit the crime, which is adapted to the perpetration of it, whether the purpose fails by reason of interruption . . . or for other extrinsic cause.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. O’Neil, 65 C…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Connecticut
v.
Albert PAGAN.
v.
Albert PAGAN.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
May 22, 2007.
Published
Glenn W. Falk, special public defender, in support of the petition.
Lisa A. Riggione, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition.
The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 100 Conn.App. 671, 918 A.2d 1036 (2007), is denied.