green
Positive treatment
13.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2007
2016
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Wilson
(2×)
See State v. Blango, 103 Conn. App. 100, 111 , 927 A.2d 964 (no abuse of discretion in admit- ting evidence of two separate incidents in which defen- dant displayed weapon when court limited testimony to that which was necessary to support victim’s allegation that defendant displayed gun), cert. denied, 284 Conn. 919 , 933 A.2d 721 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Franklin
(2×)
See State v. Blango , 103 Conn.App. 100 , 110, 927 A.2d 964 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 919 , 933 A.2d 721 (2007) ; see also State v. Stevenson , 53 Conn.App. 551 , 571-72, 733 A.2d 253 , cert. denied, 250 Conn. 917 , 734 A.2d 990 (1999) ; State v. Sivri , 46 Conn.App. 578 , 584, 700 A.2d 96 , cert. denied, 243 Conn. 938 , 702 A.2d 644 (1997). 20 The defendant appears to agree that the admission into evidence of the collection of the bullets and casings from the New Haven crime scene and the matching of those items found in Waterbury the night before did not constitute an abuse of discretion. 21…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Omar
(2×)
See State v. Blango, 103 Conn. App. 100, 113 , 927 A.2d 964 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 919 , 933 A.2d 721 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Ovechka
(2×)
See State v. Blango, 103 Conn. App. 100, 117 , 927 A.2d 964 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 919 , 933 A.2d 721 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Banks
(2×)
See State v. Blango, 103 Conn. App. 100, 117 , 927 A.2d 964 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 919 , 933 A.2d 721 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Burgos-Torres
(2×)
See State v. Blango, 103 Conn. App. 100, 113 , 927 A.2d 964 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 919 , 933 A.2d 721 (2007); State v. Cromety, 102 Conn. App. 425, 431 , 925 A.2d 1133 (“[a]lthough our Supreme Court has held that unpreserved claims of prosecutorial impropriety are to be reviewed under the Williams factors, that rule does not pertain to mere evidentiary claims masquerading as constitutional violations”), cert. denied, 284 Conn. 912 , 931 A.2d 932 (2007); see also State v. Rowe, 279 Conn. 139, 149 , 900 A.2d 1276 (2006) (unpreserved and unreviewable evidentiary claim cannot be transformed…
cited
Cited "see"
Mann v. Regan
See Birchard v. New Britain, 103 Conn. App. 79, 89 , 927 A.2d 985 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 920 , 933 A.2d 721 (2007).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Patterson
(2×)
In limiting the evidence of the prior shootings, the court ensured that the relevant facts were shorn of prejudicial and irrelevant detail and that the jury was not distracted by the need to hold mini-trials regarding matters that were not pertinent to this case.10 The trial court’s actions are significant because ‘‘the care with which the [trial] court weighed the evidence and devised measures for reducing its prejudicial effect militates against a finding of abuse of discretion.’’ (Inter- nal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Beavers, 290 Conn. 386, 406 , 963 A.2d 956 (2009); see …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bligh v. Travelers Home & Marine Ins. Co.
Harris v. Shea, 79 Conn. App. 840 , 842–43, 832 A.2d 97 (2003); see also 71 C.J.S. 38, Pleading § 3 (2000) (purpose of pleadings is to frame, present, define, and narrow the issues, and to form the foundation of, and to limit, the proof to be submitted on the trial).’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Birchard v. New Britain, 103 Conn. App. 79, 83 , 927 A.2d 985 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 920 , 933 A.2d 721 (2007).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Collins
(4×)
These actions are significant because "the care with which the [trial] court weighed the evidence and devised measures for reducing its prejudicial effect militates against a finding of abuse of discretion." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Beavers, supra, 290 Conn. at 406 , 963 A.2d 956 ; see id. (noting that trial court excluded "most egregious and prejudicial uncharged misconduct ... [including] the defendant's comments about the financial benefits that would inure to his family from the death of his mother, the homicidal portion of his threat to [his former wife] in the early 1…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Connecticut
v.
Emmanuel BLANGO.
v.
Emmanuel BLANGO.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 26, 2007.
Rogers.
Published
Annacarina Del Mastro, senior assistant public defender, in support of the petition.
Margaret Gaffney Radionovas, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition.
The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 103 Conn.App. 100, 927 A.2d 964 (2007), is denied.
[*722] ROGERS, C.J., and SCHALLER, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.