green
Positive treatment
3.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Ellison
See State v. Perruccio, 192 Conn. 154, 162 , 471 A.2d 632 , appeal dismissed, 469 U.S. 801 , 105 S. Ct. 55 , 83 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Smith, No. Cr 293692 (Feb. 20, 2001)
See State v. Perruccio, 192 Conn. 154 , 158 , 471 A.2d 632 , appeal dismissed, 469 U.S. 801 , 105 S.Ct. 55 , 83 L.E.2d 6 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Tucker
Subsequent case law has since “invoked Pickering as the controlling standard for evaluating vagueness challenges to the morals provision of § 53-21.” State v. Schriver, supra, 207 Conn. 463 ; see State v. Perruccio, 192 Conn. 154, 161 , 471 A.2d 632 , appeal dismissed, 469 U.S. 801 , 105 S. Ct. 55 , 83 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Texas Ass'n of Business v. Texas Air Control Board
See Safe Water Foundation of Texas v. City of Houston, 661 S.W.2d 190, 193 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1983, writ ref'd n.r.e.) (recognizing precedent of this court as according broad right of standing), app. dism’d, 469 U.S. 801 , 105 S.Ct. 55 , 83 L.Ed.2d 6 (1984); Texas Industrial Traffic League v. Railroad Comm’n of Texas, 628 S.W.2d 187 (Tex.App.—Austin) (discussing Supreme Court’s expansive approach to standing to allow access to Texas courts), rev’d, 633 S.W.2d 821 (Tex.1982) (per curiam), overruled by Tex. Ass’n of Bus. v. Tex. Air Control Bd., 852 S.W.2d 440 (Tex.1993)…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. ALVARO F.
See also State v. Perruccio, 192 Conn. 154, 162 , 471 A.2d 632 (double jeopardy claim failed because “sexual assault in the fourth degree and risk of injury [to a child] each require proof of an element not required by the other”), appeal dismissed, 469 U.S. 801 , 105 S. Ct. 55 , 83 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Gewily
See, e.g., State v. Perruccio, 192 Conn. 154, 159-60 , 471 A. 2d 632 (state need not show that child actually was harmed, only “the creation of a prohibited situation”), appeal dismissed, 469 U.S. 801 , 105 S. Ct. 55 , 83 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Lutters
See, e.g., State v. Moran, 264 Conn. 593, 616 , 825 A.2d 111 (2003) (due process requires that statutory scheme “afford a person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what [conduct] is permitted or prohibited” [internal quotation marks omitted]); see also State v. Perruccio, 192 Conn. 154, 164 , 471 A.2d 632 (“laws [must] give [a] person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he [or she] may act accordingly” [internal quotation marks omitted]), appeal dis missed, 469 U.S. 801 , 105 S. Ct. 55 , 83 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. John G.
See, e.g., State v. Perruccio, 192 Conn. 154, 159-61 , 471 A.2d 632 , appeal dismissed, 469 U.S. 801 , 105 S. Ct. 55 , 83 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Weiner
In re John C., 20 Conn. App. 694, 696 , 569 A.2d 1154 (1990); see also State v. Perruccio, 192 Conn. 154, 162 , 471 A.2d 632 , appeal dismissed, 469 U.S. 801 , 105 S. Ct. 55 , 83 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Perruccio
v.
Connecticut
v.
Connecticut
No. 83-1979.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 1, 1984.
Published
Appeal from Sup. Ct. Conn. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.