green
Positive treatment
10.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 2019 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2019
2022
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Pernell
See State v. Brett B., 186 Conn. App. 563 , 583–85, 200 A.3d 706 (2018), cert. denied, 330 Conn. 961 , 199 A.3d 560 (2019).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Inglis v. Commissioner of Correction
As to these expert witnesses, the habeas court held that ‘‘the weight of expert opinions of [Kovera] and [Carlow] does not allow this court to substitute their opinion[s] of perceived deficiencies with the actual rationale or lack of rationale that existed for [trial counsel] in 2009.’’ ‘‘[F]ailing to retain or utilize an expert witness is not deficient when part of a legitimate and reasonable defense strategy.’’ Grover v. Commissioner of Correc- tion, 183 Conn. App. 804, 821 , 194 A.3d 316 (holding that counsel was not ineffective in failing to retain or to request funding to …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dorfman v. Smith
(2×)
See, e.g., Fiondella v. Meriden, 186 Conn. App. 552, 563 , 200 A.3d 196 (2018), cert. denied, 330 Conn. 961 , 199 A.3d 20 (2019).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Dorfman v. Smith
(2×)
See, e.g., Fiondella v. Meriden, 186 Conn. App. 552, 563 , 200 A.3d 196 (2018), cert. denied, 330 Conn. 961 , 199 A.3d 20 (2019).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Gonzalez
See State v. Jones, 115 Conn. App. 581 , 597–600, 974 A.2d 72 (holding that it was not improper for prosecutor to argue that defen- dant’s DNA was contained in DNA mixture found in victim when evidence was presented at trial that defen- dant was included as contributor to mixture), cert. denied, 293 Conn. 916 , 979 A.2d 492 (2009); see also State v. Brett B., 186 Conn. App. 563, 584 , 200 A.3d 706 (2018), cert. denied, 330 Conn. 961 , 199 A.3d 560 (2019).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Turner
See State v. Natal, supra, 113 Conn. App. 285–86 (unpreserved Porter claim was not kind of claim that justifies plain error review); see also State v. Brett B., 186 Conn. App. 563 , 602–606, 200 A.3d 706 (2018) (same), cert. denied, 330 Conn. 961 , 199 A.3d 560 (2019); State v. Wynne, 182 Conn. App. 706, 720 , 190 A.3d 955 (same), cert. denied, 330 Conn. 911 , 193 A.3d 50 (2018). 13 Additionally, in his reply brief, the defendant requests that this court exercise its supervisory authority to review his claim of instructional error that was decided against him by the Appellate Court.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Watson
Generally, expert testimony is admissible if (1) the wit- ness has a special skill or knowledge directly applicable to a matter in issue, (2) that skill or knowledge is not common to the average person, and (3) the testimony would be helpful to the court or jury in considering the issues.’’ (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Iban C., 275 Conn. 624, 634 , 881 A.2d 1005 (2005); see also State v. Brett B., 186 Conn. App. 563 , 600–601, 200 A.3d 706 (2018), cert. denied, 330 Conn. 961 , 199 A.3d 560 (2019); see generally E.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cargil NICHOLSON
v.
COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION
v.
COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jan 10, 2019.
Published
The petitioner Cargil Nicholson's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 186 Conn.App. 398, ___ A.3d ___ (2018), is denied.