green
Positive treatment
5.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 2010 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2010
2018
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Roberts
See State v. Hanson, 117 Conn. App. 436, 454 , 979 A.2d 576 (2009) (noting that court had no responsibility to require pre- sentation of evidence), cert. denied, 295 Conn. 907 , 989 A.2d 604 , cert. denied, 562 U.S. 986 , 131 S. Ct. 425 , 178 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Gudino v. Commissioner of Correction
See State v. Hanson, 117 Conn. App. 436, 456 , 979 A.2d 576 (2009) (“[i]n general, the only allowable challenges after a plea are those relating either to the voluntary and intelligent nature of the plea or the exercise of the trial court’s jurisdiction” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 295 Conn. 907 , 989 A.2d 604 (2010). 2 We refer by initials to those selected to be jurors so as to protect their legitimate privacy interests.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Henderson v. Commissioner of Correction
In general, the only allowable challenges after a plea are those relating either to the voluntary and intelligent nature of the plea or the exercise of the trial court's jurisdiction." (Citation omitted.) State v. Johnson , 253 Conn. 1 , 80, 751 A.2d 298 (2000) ; see also State v. Hanson , 117 Conn. App. 436 , 456, 979 A.2d 576 (2009), cert. denied, 295 Conn. 907 , 989 A.2d 604 , cert. denied, 562 U.S. 986 , 131 S.Ct. 425 , 178 L.Ed.2d 331 (2010).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Douglas
(2×)
See, e.g., State v. Hart, 118 Conn. App. 763, 781 , 986 A.2d 1058 (“[t]he defendant’s conduct, in which he facilitated and participated in a confrontation between a victim and four masked individuals, one armed . . . on a dead-end residential street, evidenced an extreme indifference to human life . . . [and the] jury had sufficient evidence to support the defendant’s conviction of reckless endangerment in the first degree”), cert. denied, 295 Conn. 908 , 989 A.2d 604 (2010).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Nuzzo v. Nathan
(2×)
If two rational minds could reasonably draw different inferences from facts in evidence, whether controverted or uncontroverted, the decision is for the jury.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Magnon v. Glickman, 185 Conn. 234, 239 , 440 A.2d 909 (1981); see Campbell v. Palmer, 20 Conn. App. 544, 549 , 568 A.2d 1064 (1990) (“[p]roof by circumstantial evidence is sufficient where rational minds could reasonably and logically draw the inference” [internal quotation marks omitted]); see also State v. Hart, 118 Conn. App. 763, 778 , 986 A.2d 1058 (“there is no legal distinction between …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State of Connecticut
v.
Corey J. Hart
v.
Corey J. Hart
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Feb 25, 2010.
Raymond L. Durelli, special public defender, in support of the petition., Adam E. Mattei, special deputy assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.
Vertefeuille.
Published
The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 118 Conn. App. 763 (AC 29767), is denied.
VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.