officer violation in Connecticut

2014In this opinion the other judges concurred. * The listing of judges reflects their seniority status on this court as of the date of oral argument. 1 The court found the defendant not guilty of interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a. 2 We refer to the victims by their first initials to protect their privacy interests. 3 ‘‘Facebook is a social network website.’’ State v. Damone, 148 Conn. App. 137 , 151 n.3, 83 A.3d 1227 , cert. denied, 311 Conn. 936 , 88 A.3d 550 (2014). ‘‘ ‘Each [Facebook] user maintains a ‘‘profile,’’ which is a webpage containing basic inform

2014In this opinion the other judges concurred. * The listing of judges reflects their seniority status on this court as of the date of oral argument. 1 The court found the defendant not guilty of interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a. 2 We refer to the victims by their first initials to protect their privacy interests. 3 ‘‘Facebook is a social network website.’’ State v. Damone, 148 Conn. App. 137 , 151 n.3, 83 A.3d 1227 , cert. denied, 311 Conn. 936 , 88 A.3d 550 (2014). ‘‘ ‘Each [Facebook] user maintains a ‘‘profile,’’ which is a webpage containing basic inform

2008State v. Silva, 93 Conn. App. 349, 360-61 , 889 A.2d 834 (2006). 3 Thereafter, we granted the state’s petition for certification to appeal, limited to the following issue: “Did the Appellate Court properly *450 conclude that there was insufficient evidence to support the defendant’s conviction on two counts of interfering with an officer in violation of ... § 53a-167a?” State v. Silva, 277 Conn. 931 , 896 A.2d 103 (2006).

2008State v. Silva, 93 Conn. App. 349, 360-61 , 889 A.2d 834 (2006). 3 Thereafter, we granted the state’s petition for certification to appeal, limited to the following issue: “Did the Appellate Court properly *450 conclude that there was insufficient evidence to support the defendant’s conviction on two counts of interfering with an officer in violation of ... § 53a-167a?” State v. Silva, 277 Conn. 931 , 896 A.2d 103 (2006).

1983In support of this claim, the defendant cites State v. Tomanelli, supra. The language in Tomanelli upon which the defendant relies was disussed by this courtin State v. Trantolo, 37 Conn. Sup. 601, 605 , 430 A.2d 465 (1981): “The defendant has attacked the sufficiency of this evidence to prove the accuracy of the radar unit, relying upon dictum in State v. Tomanelli, supra, 372 , that ‘the tuning forks themselves must be shown to be accurate if they are to be accepted as a valid test of the accuracy of the radar instrument.’ To the extent that this statement may imply that a test of the accura

1983In support of this claim, the defendant cites State v. Tomanelli, supra. The language in Tomanelli upon which the defendant relies was disussed by this courtin State v. Trantolo, 37 Conn. Sup. 601, 605 , 430 A.2d 465 (1981): “The defendant has attacked the sufficiency of this evidence to prove the accuracy of the radar unit, relying upon dictum in State v. Tomanelli, supra, 372 , that ‘the tuning forks themselves must be shown to be accurate if they are to be accepted as a valid test of the accuracy of the radar instrument.’ To the extent that this statement may imply that a test of the accura

2024State v. Marcus H., 190 Conn. App. 332, 337 , 210 A.3d 607 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 910 , 211 A.3d 71 , cert. denied, U.S. , 140 S. Ct. 540 , 205 L.

2024State v. Marcus H., 190 Conn. App. 332, 337 , 210 A.3d 607 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 910 , 211 A.3d 71 , cert. denied, U.S. , 140 S. Ct. 540 , 205 L.

2024State v. Marcus H., 190 Conn. App. 332, 337 , 210 A.3d 607 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 910 , 211 A.3d 71 , cert. denied, U.S. , 140 S. Ct. 540 , 205 L.

2024State v. Marcus H., 190 Conn. App. 332, 337 , 210 A.3d 607 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 910 , 211 A.3d 71 , cert. denied, U.S. , 140 S. Ct. 540 , 205 L.

2024State v. Marcus H., 190 Conn. App. 332, 337 , 210 A.3d 607 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 910 , 211 A.3d 71 , cert. denied, U.S. , 140 S. Ct. 540 , 205 L.

2022Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 655 , 81 S. Ct. 1684 , 6 L.

2022Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 655 , 81 S. Ct. 1684 , 6 L.

2019State v. John B., 102 Conn. App. 453, 455 , 925 A.2d 1235 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 906 , 931 A.2d 267 (2007) (attempted kidnapping case).2 The petitioner’s conviction was upheld on direct appeal.

2019State v. John B., 102 Conn. App. 453, 455 , 925 A.2d 1235 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 906 , 931 A.2d 267 (2007) (attempted kidnapping case).2 The petitioner’s conviction was upheld on direct appeal.

2019State v. John B., 102 Conn. App. 453, 455 , 925 A.2d 1235 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 906 , 931 A.2d 267 (2007) (attempted kidnapping case).2 The petitioner’s conviction was upheld on direct appeal.

2019State v. John B., 102 Conn. App. 453, 455 , 925 A.2d 1235 , cert. denied, 284 Conn. 906 , 931 A.2d 267 (2007) (attempted kidnapping case).2 The petitioner’s conviction was upheld on direct appeal.

2018The defendant, Kenneth Porter, appeals 1 from the judgment of the Appellate Court affirming his judgment of conviction, following a jury trial, of assault of public safety personnel in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167c (a) (1) and interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a. 2 State v. Porter , 167 Conn. App. 281 , 283-84, 142 A.3d 1216 (2016).

2018The defendant, Kenneth Porter, appeals 1 from the judgment of the Appellate Court affirming his judgment of conviction, following a jury trial, of assault of public safety personnel in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167c (a) (1) and interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a. 2 State v. Porter , 167 Conn. App. 281 , 283-84, 142 A.3d 1216 (2016).

2017The court rendered its judgment of conviction and sentenced the [petitioner] to an effective term of fourteen years of incarceration followed by four years of special parole." Id., at 224, 11 A.3d 717 .

2017Following a jury trial, the petitioner was found guilty of kidnapping in the second degree and interfering with an officer. 3 Id., at 712, 72 A.3d 435 .

2016If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, should this court modify State v. Williams, [supra, 205 Conn. 456 , 534 A.2d 230 ], to proscribe not only fighting words, but also true threats and other categories of unprotected speech? "3.

2016If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, should this court modify State v. Williams, [supra, 205 Conn. 456 , 534 A.2d 230 ], to proscribe not only fighting words, but also true threats and other categories of unprotected speech? "3.

2014State v. Baptiste, 114 Conn. App. 750, 772 , 970 A.2d 816 (2009).

2014State v. Baptiste, 114 Conn. App. 750, 772 , 970 A.2d 816 (2009).

2014The second part of the information charged the petitioner with committing the crimes cited while released on bond in violation of General Statutes § 53a-40b. 2 The order further required, inter alia, Silverstein to ‘‘discuss with the client[s] the basis for the advice, including Phillips v. Warden, 220 Conn. 112 [ 595 A.2d 1356 ] (1991)’’ and to offer clients the opportunity to consult with independent counsel of the clients’ choosing concerning the issue at Silverstein’s expense. 3 Judge Silbert’s order referred to Silverstein’s criminal charges, but the trial court told the petitioner that h

2014The second part of the information charged the petitioner with committing the crimes cited while released on bond in violation of General Statutes § 53a-40b. 2 The order further required, inter alia, Silverstein to ‘‘discuss with the client[s] the basis for the advice, including Phillips v. Warden, 220 Conn. 112 [ 595 A.2d 1356 ] (1991)’’ and to offer clients the opportunity to consult with independent counsel of the clients’ choosing concerning the issue at Silverstein’s expense. 3 Judge Silbert’s order referred to Silverstein’s criminal charges, but the trial court told the petitioner that h

2014The defendant, Kacey Lewis, was convicted, after a jury trial, of assault in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-61 (a) (1), kidnapping in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-92 (a) (2) (A), interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a (a), and possession of narcotics in violation of General Statutes § 21a-279 (a). 1 The defendant now appeals from his conviction of kidnapping in the first degree, claiming that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to support that conviction under the rule of State v. Salamon, 287 Conn.

2014The defendant, Kacey Lewis, was convicted, after a jury trial, of assault in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-61 (a) (1), kidnapping in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-92 (a) (2) (A), interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a (a), and possession of narcotics in violation of General Statutes § 21a-279 (a). 1 The defendant now appeals from his conviction of kidnapping in the first degree, claiming that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to support that conviction under the rule of State v. Salamon, 287 Conn.

2013The petitioner appealed from the judgment of conviction to this court, and this court remanded the case to the trial court “with direction to vacate the sentence on the count of interfering with an officer and to combine the conviction of interfering with an officer with that of assault of public safety personnel.” State v. Dieudonne, 109 Conn. App. 375, 380 , 952 A.2d 69 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 924 , 958 A.2d 154 (2008).

2013The petitioner appealed from the judgment of conviction to this court, and this court remanded the case to the trial court “with direction to vacate the sentence on the count of interfering with an officer and to combine the conviction of interfering with an officer with that of assault of public safety personnel.” State v. Dieudonne, 109 Conn. App. 375, 380 , 952 A.2d 69 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 924 , 958 A.2d 154 (2008).

2013The petitioner appealed from the judgment of conviction to this court, and this court remanded the case to the trial court “with direction to vacate the sentence on the count of interfering with an officer and to combine the conviction of interfering with an officer with that of assault of public safety personnel.” State v. Dieudonne, 109 Conn. App. 375, 380 , 952 A.2d 69 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 924 , 958 A.2d 154 (2008).

2013The petitioner appealed from the judgment of conviction to this court, and this court remanded the case to the trial court “with direction to vacate the sentence on the count of interfering with an officer and to combine the conviction of interfering with an officer with that of assault of public safety personnel.” State v. Dieudonne, 109 Conn. App. 375, 380 , 952 A.2d 69 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 924 , 958 A.2d 154 (2008).

2011Following our grant of certification, this court issued its decision in State v. Kitchens, 299 Conn. 447, 482-83 , 10 A.3d 942 (2011), wherein we held that, “when the trial court provides counsel with a copy of the proposed jury instructions, allows a meaningful opportunity for their review, solicits comments from counsel regarding changes or modifications and counsel affirmatively accepts the instructions proposed or given, the defendant may be deemed to have knowledge of any potential flaws therein and to have waived implicitly the constitutional right to challenge the instructions on direct

2011Following our grant of certification, this court issued its decision in State v. Kitchens, 299 Conn. 447, 482-83 , 10 A.3d 942 (2011), wherein we held that, “when the trial court provides counsel with a copy of the proposed jury instructions, allows a meaningful opportunity for their review, solicits comments from counsel regarding changes or modifications and counsel affirmatively accepts the instructions proposed or given, the defendant may be deemed to have knowledge of any potential flaws therein and to have waived implicitly the constitutional right to challenge the instructions on direct

2011The defendant does not appeal his conviction on the charge of interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a, and, therefore, we do not address that conviction here. 2 The defendant also claims that his rights were violated under article first, § 8, of the constitution of Connecticut, but fails to provide the analysis required by State v. Geisler, 222 Conn. 672, 684-86 , 610 A.2d 1225 (1992).

2011The defendant does not appeal his conviction on the charge of interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a, and, therefore, we do not address that conviction here. 2 The defendant also claims that his rights were violated under article first, § 8, of the constitution of Connecticut, but fails to provide the analysis required by State v. Geisler, 222 Conn. 672, 684-86 , 610 A.2d 1225 (1992).

2011The defendant acknowledged that he had not objected to the court’s jury instructions on the charges of assault of a police officer and interfering with an officer and, therefore, sought review under State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233, 239-40 , 567 A.2d 823 (1989). 5 State v. Baptiste, supra, 114 Conn. App. 761 .

2011The defendant acknowledged that he had not objected to the court’s jury instructions on the charges of assault of a police officer and interfering with an officer and, therefore, sought review under State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233, 239-40 , 567 A.2d 823 (1989). 5 State v. Baptiste, supra, 114 Conn. App. 761 .

2011We granted the defendant’s petition for certification limited to the following question: “Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendant waived any constitutional or plain error claim that the trial court’s jury instructions on the charge of assault of a police officer in violation of ... § 53a-167c (a) deprived him of his right to a fair trial and his right to present a defense?” States v. Baptiste, 294 Conn. 910 , 983 A.2d 274 (2009).

2011We granted the defendant’s petition for certification limited to the following question: “Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendant waived any constitutional or plain error claim that the trial court’s jury instructions on the charge of assault of a police officer in violation of ... § 53a-167c (a) deprived him of his right to a fair trial and his right to present a defense?” States v. Baptiste, 294 Conn. 910 , 983 A.2d 274 (2009).

2010These convictions are not at issue in this appeal. 2 Subsequent protective orders were issued on August 6 and 29, and November 8, 2007. 3 The defendant told police that when he first saw the victim at the church he was on a sidewalk area outside the church and that upon seeing the victim, he hid in some bushes, then went inside after the victim and went upstairs. 4 General Statutes § 53a-181c provides in relevant part: “A person is guilty of stalking in the first degree when he commits stalking in the second degree as provided in section 53a-181d and . . . such conduct violates a court order i

2010These convictions are not at issue in this appeal. 2 Subsequent protective orders were issued on August 6 and 29, and November 8, 2007. 3 The defendant told police that when he first saw the victim at the church he was on a sidewalk area outside the church and that upon seeing the victim, he hid in some bushes, then went inside after the victim and went upstairs. 4 General Statutes § 53a-181c provides in relevant part: “A person is guilty of stalking in the first degree when he commits stalking in the second degree as provided in section 53a-181d and . . . such conduct violates a court order i

2010These convictions are not at issue in this appeal. 2 Subsequent protective orders were issued on August 6 and 29, and November 8, 2007. 3 The defendant told police that when he first saw the victim at the church he was on a sidewalk area outside the church and that upon seeing the victim, he hid in some bushes, then went inside after the victim and went upstairs. 4 General Statutes § 53a-181c provides in relevant part: “A person is guilty of stalking in the first degree when he commits stalking in the second degree as provided in section 53a-181d and . . . such conduct violates a court order i

2010These convictions are not at issue in this appeal. 2 Subsequent protective orders were issued on August 6 and 29, and November 8, 2007. 3 The defendant told police that when he first saw the victim at the church he was on a sidewalk area outside the church and that upon seeing the victim, he hid in some bushes, then went inside after the victim and went upstairs. 4 General Statutes § 53a-181c provides in relevant part: “A person is guilty of stalking in the first degree when he commits stalking in the second degree as provided in section 53a-181d and . . . such conduct violates a court order i

2009In this opinion the other justices concurred. 1 We granted the state’s petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court limited to the following issue: “Did the Appellate Court properly reverse the judgment of the trial court convicting the defendant of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor?” State v. Morelli, 285 Conn. 901 , 938 A.2d 594 (2007). 2 The defendant also was charged with interfering with an officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a.