State v. Bellino, 635 A.2d 812 (Conn. 1994). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Bellino, 635 A.2d 812 (Conn. 1994). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
24 citation events (10 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994 2010 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" State v. Hall (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2018 · signal: accord · confidence high
Such an instruction would have been unnecessary and potentially confusing to the jury." State v. Lemoine , supra, 256 Conn. at 200 -201 , 770 A.2d 491 ; accord State v. Bellino , 31 Conn. App. 385 , 391, 625 A.2d 1381 (1993) ("[l]egal principles concerning the duty to retreat did not play a part in this case, and there is no reason to believe that the jury would have considered that issue on its own"), appeal dismissed, 228 Conn. 851 , 635 A.2d 812 (1994).
cited Cited "see" State v. Lucky
Conn. App. Ct. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Deptula, 31 Conn. App. 140, 150 , 623 A.2d 525 (1993), appeal dismissed, 228 Conn. 852 , 635 A.2d 812 (1994).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Smith
Conn. App. Ct. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
Id., 781-82 (trial court understood factual basis of defendant’s request where defense counsel presented oral argument outlining in detail factual basis for request to charge); see State v. Deptula, 31 Conn. App. 140, 146 , 623 A.2d 525 (1993) (reading of transcript revealed that trial court and defendant’s counsel understood facts relied on for requested charge), appeal dismissed, 228 Conn. 852 , 635 A.2d 812 (1994).
cited Cited "see" State v. Richardson
Conn. App. Ct. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Deptula, 31 Conn. App. 140, 148 , 623 A.2d 525 (1993) , appeal dismissed, 228 Conn. 852 , 635 A.2d 812 (1994) .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State of Connecticut
v.
Charles Bellino
14802.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Feb 1, 1994.
635 A.2d 812
Lauren Weisfeld, assistant public defender, for the appellant (defendant)., Carolyn K. Longstreth, assistant state’s attorney, with whom were Michael Dearington, state’s attorney, and, on the brief, John Waddock, assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published
Per Curiam.

The sole issues in this criminal appeal concern the adequacy of the trial court’s instructions on self-defense. A jury convicted the defendant, Charles Bellino, of manslaughter in the first degree, attempted assault in the first degree and carrying a pistol without a permit. In State v. Bellino, 31 Conn. App. 385, 389-96, 625 A.2d 1381 (1993), the Appellate Court concluded that the trial court’s instructions on self-defense had not violated the defendant’s constitutional rights.[*852] We granted the defendant’s petition for certification to appeal the merits of this conclusion.[1]

After examining the record on appeal and after considering the briefs and the arguments of the parties, we have determined that the appeal in this case should be dismissed on the ground that certification was improvidently granted.

The appeal is dismissed.

1

We granted the defendant’s petition for certification to appeal limited to the following issues:

“1. Whether the Appellate Court properly held that the instructions on self-defense, General Statutes § 53a-19, did not abuse the court’s discretion, where it did not instruct on the statutory duty to retreat and the limitations on that duty?
“2. Whether the Appellate Court properly held that the instructions on self-defense, relative to the subjective-objective test employed by the jury in evaluating the degree of force used, were correct?” State v. Bellino, 226 Conn. 917, 628 A.2d 988 (1993).