State v. Alamo, 754 A.2d 161 (Conn. 2000). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Alamo, 754 A.2d 161 (Conn. 2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
30 citation events (27 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Alexander (connappct, 2009-06-09)
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" State v. Alexander
Conn. App. Ct. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
This fact indicates that the defendant had not maintained the location and the items within it in a private manner at the time of the detectives’ entry; see State v. Boyd, 57 Conn. App. 176, 185 , 749 A.2d 637 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 912 , 754 A.2d 162 (2000); and is one of the factors considered in determining whether he manifested a subjective expectation of privacy in the common hallway.
cited Cited "see" State v. Smith
Conn. App. Ct. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Boyd, 57 Conn. App. 176, 183 , 749 A.2d 637 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 912 , 754 A.2d 162 (2000).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Vallejo
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Boyd, 57 Conn. App. 176, 187 , 749 A.2d 637 (2000) (objective expectation of privacy stems from place where “society is prepared, because of its code and values and its notions of custom and civility, to give deference to a manifested expectation of privacy” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 253 Conn. 912 , 754 A.2d 162 (2000).
cited Cited "see" State v. Whitfield
Conn. App. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Johnson, 57 Conn. App. 156 , 748 A.2d 334 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 912 , 754 A.2d 162 (2000).
cited Cited "see" State v. Rivera
Conn. App. Ct. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Alamo, 57 Conn. App. 233, 236 , 748 A.2d 316 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 912 , 754 A.2d 161 (2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Houghtaling
Conn. · 2017 · signal: see also · confidence low
Ed. 2d 220 (1979); see also State v. Boyd, 57 Conn. App. 176, 185 , 749 A.2d 637 (‘‘a subjective expectation of privacy rests on finding conduct [through which a defendant] has demonstrated an intention to keep activities or things private and free from knowing exposure to others’ view’’), cert. denied, 253 Conn. 912 , 754 A.2d 162 (2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Houghtaling
Conn. · 2017 · signal: see also · confidence low
See, e.g., Smith v. Maryland , 442 U.S. 735 , 740, 99 S.Ct. 2577 , 61 L.Ed.2d 220 (1979) ; see also **342 State v. Boyd , 57 Conn.App. 176 , 185, 749 A.2d 637 ("a subjective expectation of privacy rests on finding conduct [through which a defendant] has demonstrated an intention to keep activities or things private and free from knowing exposure to others' view"), cert. denied, 253 Conn. 912 , 754 A.2d 162 (2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. LaFountain
Conn. App. Ct. · 2011 · signal: see also · confidence low
Our Supreme Court concluded that “subsequent case law has made clear that the Guilfoyle rule is one of disclosure, akin to that of Brady v. Maryland, [supra, 373 U.S. 83 ], and that there was no Guilfoyle violation because the defendant was aware of [the key witness] and the potential substance of his testimony, and could have taken action to procure his testimony.” (Emphasis added.) State v. Tomas D., supra, 296 Conn. 510 ; see also State v. Johnson, 57 Conn. App. 156, 162 , 748 A.2d 334 (state fully complied with Guilfoyle rule where information disclosed to defendant without being offer…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. TOMAS D.
Conn. · 2010 · signal: see also · confidence low
See State v. Mitchell, supra, 165 ; see also State v. Johnson, 57 Conn. App. 156, 161-62 , 748 A.2d 334 (prosecutor complied with rule by disclosing information that victim had given defendant permission to visit her room after sexual assault, and did not have “a further duty to present that information to the trier of fact when the defendant failed to offer the evidence to the jury”), cert. denied, 253 Conn. 912 , 754 A.2d 162 (2000); State v. Jurgensen, 42 Conn. App. 751, 762 , 681 A.2d 981 (“the state is not under an obligation to call every competent witness to testify”), cert. den…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Payne (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2010 · signal: see also · confidence low
See id.; see also State v. Boyd, 57 Conn. App. 176, 188 , 749 A.2d 637 (considering, inter alia, property interests to determine whether expectation of privacy is one society would deem reasonable), cert. denied, 253 Conn. 912 , 754 A.2d 162 (2000).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
v.
JOE ALAMO
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
May 18, 2000.
754 A.2d 161
H. Jeffrey Beck, in support of the petition., Susann E. Gill, senior assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.
Published

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 57 Conn. App. 233 (AC 19059), is denied.