State v. Davis, 958 A.2d 160 (Conn. 2008). · Go Syfert
State v. Davis, 958 A.2d 160 (Conn. 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
78 citation events (78 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Hamann v. Carl (connappct, 2020-03-24)
Treatment trajectory · 2008 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2008 2017 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Hamann v. Carl
Conn. App. Ct. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn. App. 316, 331 , 951 A.2d 587 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008). ‘‘It is a well established principle of appellate procedure that the appellant has the duty of providing this court with a record adequate to afford review. . . .
discussed Cited "see" Nietupski v. Del Castillo
Conn. App. Ct. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn. App. 316 , 330 n.13, 951 A.2d 587 (trial court’s denial of motion ‘‘includes implicit findings that it resolved any credibility determinations and any conflicts in testimony in a manner that supports its ruling’’), cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Lewis
Conn. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See, e.g., State v. Nash, supra, 278 Conn. 635–36; see State v. DelValle, 109 Conn. App. 143, 154 , 950 A.2d 603 (‘‘an officer’s impressions about a suspect’s connection to violent crime . . . may be considered in the totality of circumstances that sup- port a finding of reasonable suspicion’’), cert. denied, 289 Conn. 928 , 958 A.2d 160 (2008); see also United States v. Scott, 270 F.3d 30, 41 (1st Cir. 2001) (‘‘[w]hen the officer suspects a crime of violence, the same infor- mation that will support an investigatory stop will with- out more support a frisk’’), cert. deni…
discussed Cited "see" Lopes v. Ferrari
Conn. App. Ct. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blum v. Blum , 109 Conn. App. 316 , 331, 951 A.2d 587 ( [w]hen the decision of the trial court does not make the factual predicates of its findings clear, we will, in the absence of a motion for articulation, assume that the trial court acted properly ...), cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008)." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Hirschfeld v. Machinist , 131 Conn. App. 364 , 370-71 n.5, 27 A.3d 395 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 947 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011).
discussed Cited "see" In re Jacklyn H.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2016 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accordingly, [i]n determining the meaning of a statute . . . we are mindful that the legis- lature is presumed to have intended a just and rational result.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Teresa T. v. Ragaglia, 272 Conn. 734, 748 , 865 A.2d 428 (2005); accord Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn. App. 316, 322 , 951 A.2d 587 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008); Gervais v. Gervais, 91 Conn. App. 840, 855 , 882 A.2d 731 , cert. denied, 276 Conn. 919 , 888 A.2d 88 (2005). ‘‘[W]e look not only at the provision at issue, but also to the broader statutory scheme to ensure the coher- …
cited Cited "see" Nation-Bailey v. Bailey
Conn. App. Ct. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn. App. 316, 322 , 951 A.2d 587 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008).
discussed Cited "see" Hirschfeld v. MacHinist
Conn. App. Ct. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn. App. 316, 331 , 951 A.2d 587 (“[w]hen the decision of the trial court does not make the factual predicates of its findings clear, we will, in the *371 absence of a motion for articulation, assume that the trial court acted properly” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008).
discussed Cited "see" Schwarz v. Schwarz (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn.App. 316, 323-24 , 951 A.2d 587 ("court must have the ability to compare the [plaintiff's] financial needs at different points in time in order to determine whether those needs either have increased or have decreased over time"), cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008).
cited Cited "see" Kaczynski v. Kaczynski
Conn. App. Ct. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Kaczynski v. Kaczynski, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 158 (2008).
cited Cited "see" McKenna v. Delente
Conn. App. Ct. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn. App. 316, 331 , *171 951 A.2d 587 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Eason (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Davis, 109 Conn. App. 187, 198 , 951 A.2d 31 (sufficiently corroborated confession generally constitutes overwhelming evidence rendering errors at trial harmless), cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 160 (2008); State v. Iban C., 275 Conn. 624, 645 , 881 A.2d 1005 (2005) (same).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Rose (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See id.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." N. R. v. M. P.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2024 · signal: see also · confidence low
P. and to draw necessary inferences therefrom.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id.; see also Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn. App. 316, 329 , 951 A.2d 587 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Przekopski v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals
Conn. App. Ct. · 2011 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn.App. 316, 329 , 951 A.2d 587 , ("the trial court is the sole arbiter of witness credibility, [and] it has discretion to reject even uncontested evidence" [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Przekopski v. Zoning Board of Appeals
Conn. App. Ct. · 2011 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Blum v. Blum, 109 Conn. App. 316, 329 , 951 A.2d 587 , (“the trial court is the sole arbiter of witness credibility, [and] it has discretion to reject even uncontested evidence” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 289 Conn. 929 , 958 A.2d 157 (2008).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Connecticut
v.
Shawn DAVIS.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 25, 2008.
958 A.2d 160
Published

Glenn W. Falk, special public defender, in support of the petition.

Michele C. Lukban, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition.

The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 109 Conn.App. 187, 951 A.2d 31 (2008), is denied.