State v. Moody, 827 A.2d 707 (Conn. 2003). · Go Syfert
State v. Moody, 827 A.2d 707 (Conn. 2003). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
77 citation events (77 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Ingram (connappct, 2011-12-06) · Strongest negative: State v. Henry D. (connappct, 2017-05-16)
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2003 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" State v. Henry D. (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2017 · signal: but see · confidence high
"When a party has impeached a witness with portions of a statement that are inconsistent with his or her trial testimony, the trial court may, in its sound discretion, admit the entire statement for rehabilitative purposes, in order to place the allegedly inconsistent statement into context and to prevent the jury from being misled. " (Emphasis added.) State v. Hines , supra, 243 Conn. at 807 -808 , 709 A.2d 522 ; see also State v. Efrain M. , supra, 95 Conn.App. at 599 -600 , 899 A.2d 50 ; but see State v. Moody , 77 Conn.App. 197 , 207-208, 822 A.2d 990 , cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 827 A.…
discussed Cited "see" State v. Ingram (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Moody, 77 Conn. App. 197, 217 , 822 A.2d 990 (use of pronoun “I” in argument increases chances that arguments will deteriorate into expressions of personal opinion, but mere use of the pronoun “I” does not constitute improper argument), cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 827 A.2d 707 , cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1058 , 124 S. Ct. 831 , 157 L.
discussed Cited "see" State v. Dawes (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2010 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Moody, 77 Conn. App. 197, 217 , 822 A.2d 990 (use of pronoun “I” in argument increases chances that appropriately structured arguments will deteriorate into expressions of personal opinion), cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 827 A.2d 707 , cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1058 , 124 S. Ct. 831 , 157 L.
cited Cited "see" State v. Grant
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Ward, 76 Conn. App. 779, 795 , 821 A.2d 822 (“defendant is presumed to have notice of lesser included offenses”), cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 826 A.2d 1160 (2003).
cited Cited "see" State v. Gardner
Conn. App. Ct. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Sinclair, 197 Conn. 574, 577-78 , 500 A.2d 539 (1985).” State v. Ward, 76 Conn. App. 779, 799 , 821 A.2d 822 , cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 826 A.2d 1160 (2003).
cited Cited "see" State v. Lee
Conn. App. Ct. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Ward, 76 Conn. App. 779, 795 , 821 A.2d 822 , cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 826 A.2d 1160 (2003); State v. Vasquez, 68 Conn. App. 194, 215 , 792 A.2d 856 (2002).
cited Cited "see" State v. Browne
Conn. App. Ct. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Ward, *361 76 Conn. App. 779 , 795 n.8, 821 A.2d 822 , cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 826 A.2d 1160 (2003).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Abrahams (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Moody, 77 Conn. App. 197, 218 , 822 A.2d 990 , cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 827 A.2d 707 (2003).
cited Cited "see" State v. Perez
Conn. App. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. William B., 76 Conn. App. 730, 759-60, 822 A.2d 265 , cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 828 A.2d 618 (2003).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Hathaway (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Moody, 77 Conn. App. 197, 225 , 822 A.2d 990 , cert. denied, 264 Conn. 918 , 827 A.2d 707 (2003).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Felix R. (2×)
Conn. · 2015 · signal: see also · confidence low
I submit, ladies and gentlemen, he was trying to deceive and deflect the investigation of this case from the very beginning.’’ (Emphasis added.) 2 See State v. Ceballos, 266 Conn. 364, 367 , 832 A.2d 14 (2003) (reversing judgment on due process grounds due to improper conduct by Pepper during questioning of witnesses and closing argument); State v. Payne, 260 Conn. 446 , 447–49, 797 A.2d 1088 (2002) (reversing judgment under supervisory authority due to improper comments by Pepper during closing argument); State v. Butler, 255 Conn. 828 , 829–30, 769 A.2d 697 (2001) (affirming Appel- l…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
v.
DONALD MOODY
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jul 2, 2003.
827 A.2d 707
Jeremiah Donovan, special public defender, in support of the petition., Toni M. Smith-Rosario, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.
Cited by 20 opinions  |  Published