green
Positive treatment
6.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995
2010
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Davis
See State v. Siering , 35 Conn. App. 173 , 179, 185, 644 A.2d 958 (trial court correctly instructed jury that "if there exists consensual intercourse and the alleged victim changes her mind and communicates the revocation or change of mind of consent and the other person continues the sexual intercourse ... then it would be sexual assault." [internal quotation marks omitted] ), cert. denied, 231 Conn. 914 , 648 A.2d 158 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Baby
(2×)
See State v. Siering, 35 Conn.App. 173 , 644 A.2d 958 , 963 n. 8 (1994), cert. denied, 231 Conn. 914 , *478 648 A.2d 158 (1994) (noting that the language in Battle "is arguably dicta and thus will not be addressed here"); State v. Robinson, 496 A.2d 1067, 1070 (Me.1985) (stating that only one North Carolina case addressed the subject of post-penetration withdrawal of consent, even though Battle had been decided by that time).
cited
Cited "see"
Haggerty v. Williams
See Hill v. Hill, 35 Conn. App. 160, 172 , 644 A.2d 951 , cert. denied, 231 Conn. 914 , 648 A.2d 153 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1059 , 115 S. Ct. 669 , 130 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Foster v. Foster
See Hill v. Hill, 35 Conn. App. 160, 163 , 644 A.2d 951 , cert. denied, 231 Conn. 914 , 648 A.2d 153 , cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1059 , 115 S. Ct. 669 , 130 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Albert
See 18 S. Proc., Pt. 7, 1975 Sess., pp. 3214-27.” State v. Sieving, 35 Conn. App. 173, 181-82 , 644 A.2d 958 , cert. denied, 231 Conn. 914 , 648 A.2d 158 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Shaw
See State v. Crespo, 303 Conn. 589 , 604–605, 35 A.3d 243 (2012); see also State v. Siering, 35 Conn. App. 173 , 177–78, 644 A.2d 958 (court did not abuse discretion in denying defendant’s request to admit evidence of prior sexual conduct of victim where defendant proffered no evidence that contradicted victim’s testimony regarding source of injury), cert. denied, 231 Conn. 914 , 648 A.2d 158 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Cotton
See, e.g., State v. Siering, 35 Conn. App. 173, 178-85 , 644 A.2d 958 (noting that consent can be withdrawn at any time, even after initially consensual intercourse has commenced), cert. denied, 231 Conn. 914 , 648 A.2d 158 (1994).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Crims
(2×)
Id.; see State v. Robinson, 496 A.2d 1067 , 1069-70 & n. 2 (Me.1985) (upholding instruction on withdrawn consent because statute equated sexual intercourse and penetration); see also State v. Siering, 35 Conn.App. 173 , 644 A.2d 958, 961-62 , (rejecting argument that act is defined at "moment" of penetration because the "ordinary meaning" of sexual intercourse is continued penetration), certification denied, 231 Conn. 914 , 648 A.2d 158 (1994); cf. State v. Jones, 521 N.W.2d 662, 672 (S.D. 1994) (rejecting the idea that initial consent forecloses a rape prosecution).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State of Connecticut
v.
Robert Wiedl
v.
Robert Wiedl
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 14, 1994.
Robert G. Golger, in support of the petition.
Published
The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 35 Conn. App. 262 (AC 11360), is denied.