green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
10.0 score
“ecause the connecticut penal code has been modeled after its new york counterpart we have derived sustenance from the new york decisions interpreting its code”
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 43 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Wassil
ecause the connecticut penal code has been modeled after its new york counterpart we have derived sustenance from the new york decisions interpreting its code
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Valerie Boruski v. The United States of America, Merck, Sharp and Dohme Company, and the City of Chicago, a Municipal Corporation
Id. at 846.
discussed
Cited "see"
DiPietro v. Farmington Sports Arena, LLC
(2×)
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 716-17 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985). *982 Accordingly, the court granted the motions for summary judgment.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Crespo
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 721 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Madagoski v. Commissioner of Correction
See Pierce v. Commissioner of Correction, 100 Conn. App. 1 , 12 n.5, 916 A.2d 864 , cert. denied, 282 Conn. 908 , 920 A.2d 1017 (2007). 4 In connection with his due process claim regarding the preservation of the van, the petitioner also argues on appeal that the habeas court improperly failed to apply the balancing test enunciated in State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 724 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Bidoae v. Hartford Golf Club
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 716 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Swinton
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 716 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Sanchez
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 718-19 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Jenkins v. Talladega City Board Of Education
See Tarter v. Raybuck, 742 F.2d 977, 982 (6th Cir.1984) ("Thus, for example, the authority of the school official [to maintain school discipline and order] would not justify a degrading body cavity search of a youth in order to determine whether a student was in possession of contraband in violation of school rules."), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1051 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985); Oliver v. McClung, 919 F.Supp. 1206, 1216-19 (N.D.Ind.1995) (in light of Doe v. Renfrow and T.L.O., law clearly established that strip search of seventh-grade girls seeking missing $4.50 violates Fourth Amendm…
discussed
Cited "see"
Jenkins v. Talladega City Bd. of Ed
See Tarter v. Raybuck, 742 F.2d 977, 982 (6th Cir.1984) ("Thus, for example, the authority of the school official [to maintain school discipline and order] would not justify a degrading body cavity search of a youth in order to determine whether a student was in possession of contraband in violation of school rules."), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1051 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985); Oliver v. McClung, 919 F.Supp. 1206, 1216-19 (N.D.Ind.1995) (in light of Doe v. Renfrow and T.L.O., law clearly established that strip search of seventh-grade girls seeking missing $4.50 violates Fourth Amendm…
discussed
Cited "see"
Jenkins v. Talladega City Board of Education
See Tarter v. Raybuck, 742 F.2d 977, 982 (6th Cir.1984) ("Thus, for example, the authority of the school official [to maintain school discipline and order] would not justify a degrading body cavity search of a youth in order to determine whether a student was in possession of contraband in violation of school rules.”), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1051 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985); Oliver v. McClung, 919 F.Supp. 1206, 1216-19 (N.D.Ind.1995) (in light of Doe v. Renfrow and T.L.O., law clearly established that strip search of seventh-grade girls seeking missing $4.50 violates Fourth Amen…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Webb
Ed. 2d 342 ] (1986).” State v. Cruz, 212 Conn. 351, 364 , 562 A.2d 1071 (1989); see State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 735-36 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Balisok
See RCW 2.06.040. [3] 193 Conn. 695 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 (1985). [4] In Marino v. Vasquez, 812 F.2d 499 (9th Cir.1987) the trial court authorized the jury's reenactment to test a claim that the victim had been shot in the back of the head while sitting in a corner.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Hoeplinger
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 735-36 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Gonzalez
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 736 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Ortiz
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695 , 732 n.12, 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Man v. Raymark Industries
See Hansen v. Johns Manville Products Corp., 734 F.2d 1036, 1042 (5th Cir.1984), cert. denied 470 U.S. 1051 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985). 3 Therefore comparisons with criminal law are irrelevant.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Greene
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 719 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Williams
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 705 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Hobson
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 705 , 478 A.2d 227 , cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Preyer
See State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 718 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Magnotti
State v. Federici, 179 Conn. 46, 54-55 , 425 A.2d 916 (1979); see State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 704 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Milum
Ed. 2d 347 (1974).’ State v. Wilson, 188 Conn. 715, 720 , 453 A.2d 765 (1982).” State v. Shindell, 195 Conn. 128, 140 , 486 A.2d 637 (1985); see State v. Ouellette, supra. In State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 718 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Lee
“Thus, where evidence sought to be disclosed has been functionally, destroyed, but was subjected to scientific testing by the state prior to its destruction, a defendant must show that a retest would have been possible and must challenge the state’s test results, either by attacking the manner in which the test was conducted or by other evidence.” State v. Kersting, 50 Or.App. 461 at 473 , 623 P.2d 1095 at 1103 (1981), aff’d on other grounds, 292 Or. 350 , 638 P.2d 1145 (1982); accord, State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 1749 [ 84…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Cooper
Similarly, article first, § 8, of the Connecticut constitution provides in relevant part that ‘‘[n]o person shall be compelled to give evidence against himself . . . .’’ Conn. Const., art I, § 8; see also State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 712 , 714–15, 478 A.2d 227 (1984) (holding that there is no constitutional difference between ‘‘giving evidence’’ and ‘‘being a witness’’ against oneself), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Henderson
See, e.g., People v. Wells, 101 App. Div. 3d 1250, 1252–53, 955 N.Y.S.2d 684 (2012), appeal denied, 20 N.Y.3d 1066 , 985 N.E.2d 927 , 962 N.Y.S.2d 617 (2013); see also State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 728 , 732–33, 478 A.2d 227 (1984) (concluding that extreme emotional disturbance defense instruction was warranted on basis of testimony of witnesses regarding defendant’s bizarre behavior and appearance after murder, as well as brutal nature of murder itself), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lopez v. Commissioner of Correction
The peti- tioner testified that Carty rebuffed his request to pursue Lopez III’s testimony by saying, ‘‘that[’s] [your] son and nobody’s going to believe him.’’ The habeas court like- wise concluded that Carty did not perform deficiently in part because ‘‘[Lopez III’s] credibility would have been challenged by the state due to his relationship with [the petitioner].’’ Although it is true, as a general matter, that a witness’ close familial relationship to a party may give rise to bias; see, e.g., State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695 , 719–20, 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Campbell
See, e.g., State v. Asherman , 193 Conn. 695 , 728, 732-33, 478 A.2d 227 (1984) (holding that extreme emotional disturbance instruction was warranted on basis of testimony of witnesses regarding defendant's bizarre behavior and appearance after murder, as well as brutal nature of murder itself, which "appeared to have been perpetrated by someone who was mentally or emotionally agitated probably while under the influence of mind altering drugs"), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed. 2d 814 (1985).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Breton v. Commissioner of Correction
See, e.g., State v. Asherman , 193 Conn. 695 , 729-31, 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
R.T. Vanderbilt Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
McKinley relies on the principle that "[n]o weight may be accorded to an expert opinion [that] is totally conclusory in nature and [that] is unsupported by any discernible, factually based chain of underlying reasoning ...." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Commissioner of Transportation v. Larobina , 92 Conn.App. 15 , 26, 882 A.2d 1265 , cert. denied, 276 Conn. 931 , 889 A.2d 816 (2005) ; see also State v. Asherman , 193 Conn. 695 , 716, 478 A.2d 227 (1984) ("[i]n order to render an expert opinion ... there must be a factual basis for the opinion"), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S.Ct. …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Steven Keith Hatch v. State of Oklahoma
(2×)
Okla.Stat.Ann. tit. 21, Sec. 701.13(E) (West 1983); see also Eddings v. Oklahoma, 688 P.2d 342 (Okla.Crim.App.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1051 , 105 S.Ct. 1750 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985). 11 In 1985, however, the Oklahoma legislature gave the court the additional option of remanding the case for resentencing.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Stephen P. Wilfong v. United States
Id.; see also Brockhouse v. United States, 749 F.2d 1248, 1251 (7th Cir.1984). 8 These provisions reflect “congressional concern over various abuses by preparers in the reporting of clients’ income tax liabilities.” United States v. Ernst & Whinney, 735 F.2d 1296, 1302 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S.Ct. 1748 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985); see also Brockhouse, 749 F.2d at 1251 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Carpenter v. Warden, State Prison, No. Cv 90 1064-S (Iac) (Jul. 24, 1992)
See, e.g., State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695 , 729 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985) (defendant objected to trial court charging the jury on lesser included offense).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Veal v. Commissioner of Corrections, No. Cv-85-00090-S (Aug. 7, 1991)
See, e.g., State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695 , 729 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985) (defendant objected to trial court charging the jury on lesser included offense).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Speed v. DeLibero
Unlike, however, those cases involving outside interference, in which the question is whether and how the communication or nonevidentiary materials had an impact on the deliberation process; see e.g., State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 736-42 , 478 A.2d 227 , cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Fair v. Warden
See, e.g., State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 729 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Juzwin v. Amtorg Trading Corp.
See also, Hansen v. Johns-Man- *1059 ville Products Corp., 734 F.2d 1036, 1042 (5th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1051 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985) (punitive damages action not “essentially criminal” and thus multiple awards of punitive damages do not violate double jeopardy).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Hasan
Many of these cases have involved identification of bite marks by comparison of the defendant’s dental impressions to bite marks found on a victim’s body; see, e.g., State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695 , 478 A.2d 223 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Evans
See, e.g., State v. Asherman, 193 Conn. 695, 729-33 , 478 A.2d 227 (1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1050 , 105 S. Ct. 1749 , 84 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lorraine Lebeau, and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellant v. Libbey-Owens-Ford Company, an Ohio Corporation, and Local 19, United Glass and Ceramic Workers
See Reichenberger, 660 F.2d at 288 (plaintiffs contend that their suit is one of first impression); Christiansburg, 434 U.S. at 423-24 , 98 S.Ct. at 701 (same); see also Tarter v. Raybuck, 742 F.2d 977, 987 (6th Cir.1984) (Reichenberger stands for proposition that suit being "in an unsettled area of law ... mitigates [sic] against an award to defendants"), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1051 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
LeBeau v. Libbey-Owens-Ford Co.
See Reichenberger, 660 F.2d at 288 (plaintiffs contend that their suit is one of first impression); Christiansburg, 434 U.S. at 423-24 , 98 S.Ct. at 701 (same); see also Tarter v. Ray buck, 742 F.2d 977, 987 (6th Cir.1984) (Reichenberger stands for proposition that suit being “in an unsettled area of law ... mitigates [sic] against an award to defendants”), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1051 , 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Psychiatric Institute of Washington v. Allen
See, e.g., Hansen v. Johns-Manville Products Corp., 734 F.2d 1036, 1045 (5th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985); Vasina v. Grumman Corp., 644 F.2d 112, 118 (2d Cir.1981); Croce v. Bromley Corp., 623 F.2d 1084, 1096-1097 (5th Cir.1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jules Wakefield v. United States
Compare Hansen v. Johns-Manville Products Corp., 734 F.2d 1036, 1046 (5th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 105 S.Ct. 1749 , 1750, 84 L.Ed.2d 814 (1985), with International Harvester Co. v. Zavala, 623 S.W.2d 699, 708 (Tex.App. — Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, writ ref’d n.r.e.).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Asherman
v.
Connecticut
v.
Connecticut
No. 84-853.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 18, 1985.
Published
Citer courts: Supreme Court of Connecticut (1)
Sup. Ct. Conn. Certiorari denied.