green
Positive treatment
7.9 score
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Walker
See State v. Lebrick , 179 Conn. App. 221 , 244, 178 A.3d 1064 ("[g]iven that no readily applicable rationale for the court's holding in Williams obtained the approval of a majority of the justices, its precedential value seems, at best, to be confined to the distinct factual scenario at issue in that case"), cert. granted on other grounds, 328 Conn. 912 , 179 A.3d 1271 (2018).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Sinclair
(2×)
Like the Second Circuit, we "think it sufficient to conclude that we must rely on Supreme Court precedent before Williams to the effect that a statement triggers the protections of the [c]onfrontation [c]lause when it is made with the primary purpose of creating a record for use at a later criminal trial." United States v. James , supra, 712 F.3d at 95-96 ; see also State v. Lebrick , 179 Conn. App. 221 , 244, 178 A.3d 1064 ("[g]iven that no readily applicable rationale for the court's holding in Williams obtained the approval of a majority of the justices, its precedential value seems, at bes…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Sinclair
(2×)
Like the Second Circuit, we ‘‘think it sufficient to conclude that we must rely on Supreme Court prece- dent before Williams to the effect that a statement triggers the protections of the [c]onfrontation [c]lause when it is made with the primary purpose of creating a record for use at a later criminal trial.’’ United States v. James, supra, 712 F.3d 95–96; see also State v. Lebrick, 179 Conn. App. 221, 244 , 178 A.3d 1064 (‘‘[g]iven that no readily applicable rationale for the court’s hold- ing in Williams obtained the approval of a majority of the justices, its precedential va…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Connecticut
v.
Horvil F. LEBRICK
v.
Horvil F. LEBRICK
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Feb 28, 2018.
Cited by 3 opinions | Published
The defendant's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 179 Conn. App. 221, 178 A.3d 106 (2018), is granted, limited to the following issues:
"1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court properly admitted the probable cause hearing testimony of Keisha Parks?
"2. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court properly admitted the testimony of James Stephenson?"
KAHN, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.