green
Positive treatment
3.3 score
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Sinchak v. Commissioner of Correction
See Coney v. Commissioner of Correction, 117 Conn. App. 860, 865-66 , 982 A.2d 220 (2009), cert. denied, 294 Conn. 924 , 985 A.2d 1061 (2010).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McKenna v. Delente
(2×)
See, e.g., State v. McElveen, 117 Conn. App. 486, 489-90 , 979 A.2d 604 (2009) (“it is not the province of appellate courts to decide moot questions, disconnected from the granting of actual relief or from the determination of which no practical relief can follow” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. granted on other grounds, 294 Conn. 924 , 985 A.2d 1063 (2010).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State of Connecticut
v.
William McElveen
v.
William McElveen
SC 18522.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jan 5, 2010.
Deborah G. Stevenson, special public defender, in support of the petition., Timothy J. Sugrue, senior assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.
Vertefeuille.
Cited by 3 opinions | Published
The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 117 Conn. App. 486 (AC 29638), is granted, limited to the following issues:
“1. Whether the sole appropriate relief in the present case was the elimination of the sentence enhancement pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-40?
“2. If the answer to the first question is ‘no,’ did the Appellate Court properly dismiss the appeal as moot?”
VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.
[*925] Decided January 5, 2010 Timothy J. Sugrue, senior assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.