Strobel v. Strobel, 826 A.2d 179 (Conn. 2003). · Go Syfert
Search
Strobel v. Strobel, 826 A.2d 179 (Conn. 2003). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
16 citation events (16 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: In re Lil'Patrick T. (connappct, 2022-10-26)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" In re Lil'Patrick T.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Henry, 76 Conn. App. 515, 551 , 820 A.2d 1076 (‘‘it is not the province of an intermediate appellate court to overturn the precedent of the jurisdiction’s highest court’’), cert. denied, 264 Conn. 908 , 826 A.2d 178 (2003). 5 The evidence before the court and the court’s memorandum of decision refer to this issue as domestic violence, interpersonal violence and intimate partner violence interchangeably.
cited Cited "see" Edwards v. Commissioner of Correction
Conn. App. Ct. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Henry, 76 Conn. App. 615 , 542 n.19, 820 A.2d 1076 , cert, denied, 264 Conn. 908 , 826 A.2d 178 (2003).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." In re Mikhail M.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2025 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See e.g., State v. Henry, 76 Conn. App. 515, 551 , 820 A.2d 1076 (‘‘it is not the province of an intermediate appellate court to overturn the precedent of the jurisdiction’s highest court’’), cert. denied, 264 Conn. 908 , 826 A.2d 178 (2003). 0, 0 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL Page 3 0 Conn. App. 1 ,0 5 In re Mikhail M. omitted.) In re Fayth C., 220 Conn. App. 315 , 319–20, 297 A.3d 601 , cert. denied, 347 Conn. 907 , 298 A.3d 275 (2023).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Alexander
Conn. App. Ct. · 2006 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., State v. Henry, 76 Conn. App. 515, 548 , 820 A.2d 1076 , cert. denied, 264 Conn. 908 , 826 A.2d 178 (2003). 4 The defendant did not object to those instructions at trial and now seeks Golding review: “[A] defendant can prevail on a claim of constitutional error not preserved at trial only if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the record is adequate to review the alleged claim of error; (2) the claim is of constitutional magnitude alleging the violation of a fundamental right; (3) the alleged constitutional violation clearly exists and clearly deprived the defendant of a …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
KEVIN L. STROBEL
v.
ROSE LI-HWA STROBEL
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jun 4, 2003.
826 A.2d 179
Rose Li-Hwa Strobel, pro se, in support of the petition.
Published

No opinion found.Click here to view source material.