State v. James, 14 A.3d 1005 (Conn. 2011). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. James, 14 A.3d 1005 (Conn. 2011). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
30 citation events (30 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Stone v. Pattis (connappct, 2013-07-16)
Treatment trajectory · 2011 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2011 2018 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Stone v. Pattis
Conn. App. Ct. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Danzig v. PDPA, Inc., 125 Conn. App. 254, 262 , 11 A.3d 153 (2010), cert. denied, 300 Conn. 920 , 14 A.3d 1005 (2011), cert. denied sub nom.
discussed Cited "see" Stuart v. Freiberg (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stuart v. Snyder, 125 Conn. App. 506 , 8 A.3d 1126 (2010), cert. denied, 300 Conn. 921 , 14 A.3d 1005 (2011).
discussed Cited "see" In re Brianna L.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Danzig v. PDPA, Inc., 125 Conn. App. 242 , 252 n.7, 9 A.3d 382 (2010), cert. denied, 300 Conn. 920 , 14 A.3d 1005 (2011); Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Book, 97 Conn. App. 822, 828 , 908 A.2d 547 (2006).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Mase v. Riverview Realty Associates, LLC
Conn. App. Ct. · 2021 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Danzig v. PDPA, Inc., 125 Conn. App. 254, 261 , 11 A.3d 153 (2010), cert. denied, 300 Conn. 920 , 14 A.3d 1005 (2011), cert. denied, 564 U.S. 1044 , 131 S. Ct. 3077 , 180 L.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Sayles
Conn. App. Ct. · 2021 · signal: see also · confidence low
These exceptions have been jealously and carefully drawn . . . and the burden is on the state to establish the exception.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Ortiz, 182 Conn. App. 580, 587 , 190 A.3d 974 , cert. denied, 330 Conn. 920 , 194 A.3d 290 (2018); see also State v. Owen, 126 Conn. App. 358, 364 , 10 A.3d 1100 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 921 , 14 A.3d 1008 (2011).22 Our Supreme Court has explained: ‘‘The fourth amendment’s requirement that a warrant issue from a neutral and detached judicial officer rests upon the desirability of having magistrates rather than police…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Sayles
Conn. App. Ct. · 2021 · signal: see also · confidence low
These exceptions have been jealously and carefully drawn . . . and the burden is on the state to establish the exception.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Ortiz, 182 Conn. App. 580, 587 , 190 A.3d 974 , cert. denied, 330 Conn. 920 , 194 A.3d 290 (2018); see also State v. Owen, 126 Conn. App. 358, 364 , 10 A.3d 1100 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 921 , 14 A.3d 1008 (2011).22 Our Supreme Court has explained: ‘‘The fourth amendment’s requirement that a warrant issue from a neutral and detached judicial officer rests upon the desirability of having magistrates rather than police…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Connecticut
v.
Allen Lamont JAMES.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Mar 16, 2011.
14 A.3d 1005
Published

Robert E. Byron, special public defender, in support of the petition.

Paul J. Narducci, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition.

The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 126 Conn.App. 221, 11 A.3d 717 (2011), is denied.