State v. Coleman, 718 A.2d 15 (Conn. 1998). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Coleman, 718 A.2d 15 (Conn. 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
32 citation events (13 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Fleming (connappct, 2008-11-25)
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998 2012 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" State v. Fleming
Conn. App. Ct. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Williams, 48 Conn. App. 361, 372 , 709 A.2d 43 (jury can infer gun barrel *349 less than twelve inches by ability to handle firearm with one hand), cert. denied, 245 Conn. 907 , 718 A.2d 16 (1998).
cited Cited "see" State v. Gonzalez
Conn. App. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Williams, 48 Conn. App. 361, 367 , 709 A.2d 43 , cert. denied, 245 Conn. 907 , 718 A.2d 16 (1998).
discussed Cited "see" Saybrook Point Marina Partnership v. Town of Old Saybrook (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Coleman, 48 Conn. App. 260, 274 , 709 A.2d 590 , cert. granted, 245 Conn. 907 , 718 A.2d 15 (1998); see also Practice Book § 4061, now Practice Book (1998 Rev.) § 60-5.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Prudhomme
Conn. App. Ct. · 2022 · signal: see also · confidence low
In determining whether an out-of-court state- ment is offered for the truth of the matter asserted, and thus is hearsay, ‘‘the matter asserted [is] the matter asserted by the writing or speech, not the matter asserted by the proponent of the evidence.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Esposito, 223 Conn. 299, 315 , 613 A.2d 242 (1992); see also State v. Williams, 48 Conn. App. 361 , 368–69, 709 A.2d 43 (‘‘[t]he matter asserted [in an out-of-court statement is] the matter asserted by the writing or speech, not the matter asserted by the proponent of the evidence’’…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
v.
CHARLES COLEMAN
SC 15947.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jun 10, 1998.
718 A.2d 15
Richard Emanuel, assistant public defender, in support of the petition., Marjorie Allen Dauster, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 48 Conn. App. 260 (AC 13103), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Should this court review the defendant’s challenge to the trial court’s instructions that ‘the law is made to protect society and innocent persons, and not to protect guilty ones’?

“2. If the answer to the first question is yes, did the instructions violate the defendant’s federal or state constitutional rights to have the jury adequately instructed regarding the presumption of innocence and the concept of reasonable doubt?”

NORCOTT, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.