green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.9 score
“because proof of self-defense constitutes an absolute defense in that it renders the homicide justifiable, any error in the trial court's instruction concerning self-defense was necessarily prejudicial.”
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Smart v. Leeke
because proof of self-defense constitutes an absolute defense in that it renders the homicide justifiable, any error in the trial court's instruction concerning self-defense was necessarily prejudicial.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Duke
See State v. Moeller, 178 Conn. 67 , 420 A.2d 1153 , cert. denied, 444 U.S. 950 , 100 S. Ct. 423 , 62 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Radzvilowicz
Co., 82 Conn. 352, 365 , 73 A. 754 (1909); see State v. Moeller, 178 Conn. 67, 71 , 420 A.2d 1153 , cert. denied, 444 U.S. 950 , 100 S. Ct. 423 , 62 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Bloomington National Bank v. Telfer
The Court must decide whether the Comptroller’s action was “not in accordance with law, ... contrary to constitutional right, ... [or] in excess of statutory ... authority.” Id. § 706(2)(A)-(C); see First Union Bank & Trust Co. v. Heimann, 600 F.2d 91, 95 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 950 , 100 S.Ct. 423 , 62 L.Ed.2d 320 (1979); Webster Groves Trust Co. v. Saxon, 370 F.2d 381, 387 (8th Cir.1966) (if Comptroller “acts in excess of his statutory grant of power” or violates the Constitution, he is “subject to restraint by the courts”).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Talton
Further, although, as pointed out by the state, this appeal was not taken after the imposition of sentence, we determine that we have jurisdiction. 8 That deter mination is made because the consequences of the trial court’s ruling place this case squarely within that narrow exception to the final judgment rule that allows an appeal of interlocutory trial court rulings that, if erroneous, cannot later be remedied by the reversal of a conviction after trial; State v. Herring, supra; State v. Curcio, 191 Conn. 27, 33-34 , 463 A.2d 566 (1983); State v. Lloyd, supra, 206-208 ; State v. Grotton, 1…
cited
Cited "see"
Theodore Griffin v. George N. Martin, Iii, Warden Attorney General of the State of S. C.
See Wynn v. Mahoney, 600 F.2d 448 , 451 n. 4 (4th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 950 , 100 S.Ct. 423 , 62 L.Ed.2d 320 (1979). .
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Van Sant
“Although the Connecticut constitution contains no specific double jeopardy provision, the due process guarantees of article first, § 8, have been held to include such a protection.” State v. Rawls, 198 Conn. 111 , 113 n.3, 502 A.2d 374 (1985); see State v. Moeller, 178 Conn. 67, 77 , 420 A.2d 1153 , cert. denied, 444 U.S. 950 , 100 S. Ct. 423 , 62 L.
examined
Cited "see"
Walter A. Guthrie, 117801 v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
(4×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Wynn v. Mahoney, 600 F.2d 448, 450 (4 Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 950 , 100 S.Ct. 423 , 62 L.Ed.2d 320 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Cooper
There is no constitutional prohibition against a state prosecution for the same acts which resulted in a federal prosecution ... or vice versa.” (Citations omitted.) State v. Haskins, 188 Conn. 432, 472 , 450 A.2d 828 (1982). “[N]either federal nor state law bar[s] sequential prosecution in our state courts for an offense for which the defendant had been acquitted or convicted in a federal court.” Id.; see also State v. Moeller, 178 Conn. 67, 69-70 , 420 A.2d 1153 , cert, denied, 444 U.S. 950 , 100 S. Ct. 423 , 62 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mahoney, Correctional Superintendent
v.
Wynn
v.
Wynn
No. 79-437.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 13, 1979.
Published
Citer courts: D. South Carolina (1)
C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.