State v. Brown, 546 A.2d 283 (Conn. 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Brown, 546 A.2d 283 (Conn. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
31 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Glenn (conn, 1999-12-07)
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" State v. Glenn
Conn. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
First, the deterrent effect of the exclusionary rule is not served by permitting a challenge based on an informant’s false statements. “[T]he purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter illegal police conduct; see State v. Brown, 14 Conn. App. 605, 622 , 543 A.2d 750 , cert. denied, 208 Conn. 816 , 546 A.2d 283 (1988); and the limits on its application . . . flow from that purpose, namely, that it does not apply where the cost of suppressing reliable tangible evidence outweighs its deterrent benefit; see United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 906-907 , 104 S. Ct. 3405 , 82 L.
discussed Cited "see" State v. McMillan
Conn. App. Ct. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
“Third, the purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter illegal police conduct; see State v. Brown, 14 Conn. App. 605, 622 , 543 A.2d 750 , cert. denied, 208 Conn. 816 , 546 A.2d 283 (1988); and the limits on its application that flow from that purpose, namely, that it does not apply where the cost of suppressing reliable tangible evidence outweighs its deterrent benefit; see United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 906-907 , 104 S. Ct. 3405 , 82 L.
discussed Cited "see" Billington v. Billington
Conn. App. Ct. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
The fourth criteria that “there must be a substantial likelihood that the result of the new trial will be different”; id., 218; in some cases requires prognostication of the outcome of a future proceeding. 2 Notwithstanding that this court has on occasion resorted to a limited amount of judicial tea leaf reading; see State v. Brown, 14 Conn. App. 605, 629 , 543 A.2d 750 , cert. denied, 208 Conn. 816 , 546 A.2d 283 (1988); we need not do so in this case.
discussed Cited "see" State v. Dixon
Conn. App. Ct. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
Relying on his experience and common sense; see State v. Brown, 14 Conn. App. 605, 614 , 543 A.2d 750 , cert. denied, 208 Conn. 816 , 546 A.2d 283 (1988); the issuing judge could find probable cause that a criminal drug transaction had just occurred.
discussed Cited "see" State v. Middleton
Conn. App. Ct. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
Third, the purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter illegal police conduct; see State v. Brown, 14 Conn. App. 605, 622 , 543 A.2d 750 , cert. denied, 208 Conn. 816 , 546 A.2d 283 (1988); and the limits on its application that flow from that purpose, namely, that it does not apply where the cost of suppressing reliable tangible evidence outweighs its deterrent benefit; see United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 906-907 , 104 S. Ct. 3405 , 82 L.
cited Cited "see, e.g." State v. Enright
Conn. App. Ct. · 1988 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also State v. Brown, 14 Conn. App. 605 , 628 n.8, 543 A.2d 750 , cert. denied, 208 Conn. 816 , 546 A.2d 283 (1988).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State of Connecticut
v.
Herbert Brown
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jul 26, 1988.
546 A.2d 283
William Holden, public defender, in support of the petition., C. Robert Satti, Jr., assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.
Published

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 14 Conn. App. 605, is denied.