cited Cited "see" Cunningham v. Commissioner of Correction See State v. Cunningham, 168 Conn. App. 519 , 146 A.3d 1029 , cert. denied, 323 Conn. 938 , 151 A.3d 385 (2016).

discussed Cited "see" Skakel v. Comm'r of Corr. (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g." See State v. Quail , 168 Conn. App. 743 , 765, 148 A.3d 1092 , cert. denied, 323 Conn. 938 , 151 A.3d 385 (2016).

discussed Cited "see" State v. Elmer G. (2×) Putting a constitutional tag on a noncon- stitutional claim will no more change its essential char- acter than calling a bull a cow will change its gender.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Alex B., 150 Conn. App. 584 , 589, 90 A.3d 1078 , cert. denied, 312 Conn. 924 , 94 A.3d 1202 (2014); accord State v. Elias V., 168 Conn. App. 321 , 341–44, 147 A.3d 1102 , cert. denied, 323 Conn. 938 , 151 A.3d 386 (2016); State v. Devito, 159 Conn. App. 560 , 574, 124 A.3d 14 , cert. denied, 319 Conn. 947 , 125 A.3d 1012 (2015); State v. Cromety, 102 Conn. App. 425, 431 , 925 A.2d 1133 ,…

discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. McKinney See, e.g., State v. Cunningham, 168 Conn. App. 519 , 530–32, 146 A.3d 1029 , cert. denied, 323 Conn. 938 , 151 A.3d 385 (2016); id., 530 (claim that ‘‘the court violated [defendant’s] sixth amendment right to argue [during closing argu- ments] that the state had failed to satisfy its burden to prove an essential element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt’’ is constitutional in nature for pur- pose of second prong of Golding); see also State v. Gonzalez, 338 Conn. 108, 130 , 257 A.3d 283 (2021) (‘‘[t]he courts of this state have consistently recognized that the sixth…

discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Gonzalez See State v. Arline, supra, 223 Conn. 64 (noting that ‘‘[t]he right to present a closing argument is abridged . . . [if] a defendant is deprived of the opportunity to raise a significant issue that . . . bears directly on the defendant’s theory of the defense’’); see also State v. Cunningham, 168 Conn. App. 519, 537 , 146 A.3d 1029 (holding that defendant was not deprived of right to present closing argument because, ‘‘although the [trial] court precluded the defendant from listing . . . the ele- ments of manslaughter . . . defense counsel was allowed to present . . . his theory …

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Carolina v. Commissioner of Correction The appeal is dismissed. 1 General Statutes § 53-21 (a) provides in relevant part: ‘‘Any person who . . . (2) has contact with the intimate parts, as defined in section 53a-65, of a child under the age of sixteen years or subjects a child under sixteen years of age to contact with the intimate parts of such person, in a sexual and indecent manner likely to impair the health or morals of such child . . . shall be guilty of . . . a class B felony . . . .’’ 2 General Statutes § 53-21 (a) provides in relevant part: ‘‘Any person who (1) wilfully or unlawfully causes or permits any chi…