firearm violation in Connecticut

90 Connecticut opinions name it 2 courts 1977–2026 17 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Connecticut courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (15)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Greenegreen conn · 2005 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2009–2018 2 sentences 2009Moreover, because manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55a is not a lesser included offense of murder when the information does not allege that the murder was, in fact, committed with a firearm; State v. Greene, 274 Conn. 134, 159-60 , 874 A.2d 750 (2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S. Ct. 2981 , 165 L. 2009Moreover, because manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55a is not a lesser included offense of murder when the information does not allege that the murder was, in fact, committed with a firearm; State v. Greene, 274 Conn. 134, 159-60 , 874 A.2d 750 (2005), cert. denied, 548 U.S. 926 , 126 S. Ct. 2981 , 165 L.	1	2
Georges v. OB-GYN Servs., P.C.green conn · 2017 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024 1 sentence 2024See State v. Best, 168 Conn. App. 675, 676 , 146 A.3d 1020 (2016), cert. denied, 325 Conn. 908 , 158 A.3d 319 (2017).	1	1
State v. Catchingsgreen conn · 2017 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024 1 sentence 2024See State v. Best, 168 Conn. App. 675, 676 , 146 A.3d 1020 (2016), cert. denied, 325 Conn. 908 , 158 A.3d 319 (2017).	1	1
State v. Kerrgreen conn · 2010 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024 1 sentence 2024See State v. Zapata, 119 Conn. App. 660, 663 , 989 A.2d 626 , cert. denied, 296 Conn. 906 , 992 A.2d 1136 (2010).’’ State v. Taft, 306 Conn. 749 , 752 n.5, 51 A.3d 988 (2012). 0, 0 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL Page 3 0 Conn. App. 1 ,0 5 Taft v. Commissioner of Correction by Attorney Frank O’Reilly during his criminal trial, and the petitioner’s criminal trial counsel was Attorney Erroll Skyers.	1	1
Reeves v. Commissioner of Correctiongreen conn · 2010 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024 1 sentence 2024See State v. Zapata, 119 Conn. App. 660, 663 , 989 A.2d 626 , cert. denied, 296 Conn. 906 , 992 A.2d 1136 (2010).’’ State v. Taft, 306 Conn. 749 , 752 n.5, 51 A.3d 988 (2012). 0, 0 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL Page 3 0 Conn. App. 1 ,0 5 Taft v. Commissioner of Correction by Attorney Frank O’Reilly during his criminal trial, and the petitioner’s criminal trial counsel was Attorney Erroll Skyers.	1	1
State v. Zapatagreen connappct · 2010 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024 2 sentences 2024See State v. Zapata, 119 Conn. App. 660, 663 , 989 A.2d 626 , cert. denied, 296 Conn. 906 , 992 A.2d 1136 (2010).’’ State v. Taft, 306 Conn. 749 , 752 n.5, 51 A.3d 988 (2012). 0, 0 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL Page 3 0 Conn. App. 1 ,0 5 Taft v. Commissioner of Correction by Attorney Frank O’Reilly during his criminal trial, and the petitioner’s criminal trial counsel was Attorney Erroll Skyers. 2024See State v. Zapata, 119 Conn. App. 660, 663 , 989 A.2d 626 , cert. denied, 296 Conn. 906 , 992 A.2d 1136 (2010).’’ State v. Taft, 306 Conn. 749 , 752 n.5, 51 A.3d 988 (2012). 0, 0 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL Page 3 0 Conn. App. 1 ,0 5 Taft v. Commissioner of Correction by Attorney Frank O’Reilly during his criminal trial, and the petitioner’s criminal trial counsel was Attorney Erroll Skyers.	1	1
State v. Bestgreen connappct · 2016 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024 2 sentences 2024See State v. Best, 168 Conn. App. 675, 676 , 146 A.3d 1020 (2016), cert. denied, 325 Conn. 908 , 158 A.3d 319 (2017). 2024See State v. Best, 168 Conn. App. 675, 676 , 146 A.3d 1020 (2016), cert. denied, 325 Conn. 908 , 158 A.3d 319 (2017).	1	1
State v. Diazgreen connappct · 2008 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022See State v. Diaz, [ 109 Conn. App. 519, 559 , 952 A.2d 124 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 930 , 958 A.2d 161 (2008)].’’ (Cita- tion omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Diaz v. Commissioner of Correction, supra, 200 Conn. App. 526–27. ‘‘[In] . . . 2015, the petitioner . . . filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which is the operative petition in this appeal. 2022See State v. Diaz, [ 109 Conn. App. 519, 559 , 952 A.2d 124 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 930 , 958 A.2d 161 (2008)].’’ (Cita- tion omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Diaz v. Commissioner of Correction, supra, 200 Conn. App. 526–27. ‘‘[In] . . . 2015, the petitioner . . . filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which is the operative petition in this appeal.	1	1
State v. Diazgreen conn · 2008 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022	1	1
State v. Haywoodgreen conn · 2008 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 1 sentence 2022See State v. Diaz, [ 109 Conn. App. 519, 559 , 952 A.2d 124 , cert. denied, 289 Conn. 930 , 958 A.2d 161 (2008)].’’ (Cita- tion omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Diaz v. Commissioner of Correction, supra, 200 Conn. App. 526–27. ‘‘[In] . . . 2015, the petitioner . . . filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which is the operative petition in this appeal.	1	1
State v. Vivogreen conn · 1997 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020	1	1
State v. Gonzalezgreen connappct · 2013 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015	1	1
State v. Ramirezgreen conn · 2009 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010	1	1
State v. Terwilligergreen connappct · 2008 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009	1	1
State v. Ramirezgreen conn · 2006 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (65)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Golding green conn · 1989 2 sentences 2026The defendant could not prevail on his unpreserved claim that his convic- tions of home invasion in violation of § 53a-100aa (a) (2) and assault in the first degree by means of the discharge of a firearm in violation of the first degree assault statute (§ 53a-59 (a) (5)) violated the constitutional prohibi- tion against double jeopardy, the defendant having failed to demonstrate the existence of a constitutional violation under the third prong of State v. Golding ( 213 Conn. 233 ), as modified by In re Yasiel R. ( 317 Conn. 773 ). 2020Because we conclude that the defendant’s claim fails under the third prong of State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233, 240 , 567 A.2d 823 (1989), as a result of defense counsel’s express waiver, we do not reach the issue of whether the admission of the report constituted harmless error. 3 The constitution of Connecticut, article first, § 8, as amended by articles seventeen and twenty-nine of the amendments, provides in relevant part: ‘‘In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have a right . . . to be confronted by the witnesses against him . . . .’’ 4 In addition to the murder charge, the state	6	1996–2026
Miranda v. Arizona green scotus · 1966 2 sentences 2022The defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction, following a jury trial, of man- slaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55a (a).1 The defendant claims that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress the statements he made during two separately recorded interrogations of him by police officers.2 As to the first interrogation, which occurred on Feb- ruary 16, 2016, sometime between 11 a.m. and noon, at the Bridgeport Office of Adult Probation, the defendant contends that, because the police failed to advise him of his rights pursua 2022The defendant appeals from the judgment of conviction, following a jury trial, of man- slaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55a (a).1 The defendant claims that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress the statements he made during two separately recorded interrogations of him by police officers.2 As to the first interrogation, which occurred on Feb- ruary 16, 2016, sometime between 11 a.m. and noon, at the Bridgeport Office of Adult Probation, the defendant contends that, because the police failed to advise him of his rights pursua	5	1987–2022
State v. Whelan green conn · 1986 2 sentences 2011In this opinion the other judges concurred. 1 The defendant had also been found guilty of the crime of criminal use of a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-216 (a), but the court vacated the verdict as to that count, and the charge was dismissed. 2 The defendant’s father was sixty-nine years old. 3 The Hamden police officer in charge of the SWAT team, Captain John Lnjick, explained that a “perimeter” is a “containment area ... to keep whatever the problem is within that area”; the team did not want anyone to get out of that area because “a mobile hostage situation is much worse tha 2011In this opinion the other judges concurred. 1 The defendant had also been found guilty of the crime of criminal use of a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-216 (a), but the court vacated the verdict as to that count, and the charge was dismissed. 2 The defendant’s father was sixty-nine years old. 3 The Hamden police officer in charge of the SWAT team, Captain John Lnjick, explained that a “perimeter” is a “containment area ... to keep whatever the problem is within that area”; the team did not want anyone to get out of that area because “a mobile hostage situation is much worse tha	5	1999–2019
Bowen v. Peoples green scotus · 1986 2 sentences 2019In rendering its judgment of conviction, the trial court vacated the convictions of manslaughter and burglary in the first degree pursuant to State v. Polanco, 308 Conn. 242 , 255, 61 A.3d 1084 (2013). 9 The Appellate Court rejected the defendant’s other claims on appeal, namely, that (1) the trial court improperly admitted a tape-recorded state- ment of a witness pursuant to State v. Whelan, 200 Conn. 743, 753 , 513 A.2d 86 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 994 , 107 S. Ct. 597 , 93 L. 2011In this opinion the other judges concurred. 1 The defendant had also been found guilty of the crime of criminal use of a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-216 (a), but the court vacated the verdict as to that count, and the charge was dismissed. 2 The defendant’s father was sixty-nine years old. 3 The Hamden police officer in charge of the SWAT team, Captain John Lnjick, explained that a “perimeter” is a “containment area ... to keep whatever the problem is within that area”; the team did not want anyone to get out of that area because “a mobile hostage situation is much worse tha	5	1999–2019
Washington v. United States green scotus · 1986 2 sentences 2019In rendering its judgment of conviction, the trial court vacated the convictions of manslaughter and burglary in the first degree pursuant to State v. Polanco, 308 Conn. 242 , 255, 61 A.3d 1084 (2013). 9 The Appellate Court rejected the defendant’s other claims on appeal, namely, that (1) the trial court improperly admitted a tape-recorded state- ment of a witness pursuant to State v. Whelan, 200 Conn. 743, 753 , 513 A.2d 86 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 994 , 107 S. Ct. 597 , 93 L. 2011In this opinion the other judges concurred. 1 The defendant had also been found guilty of the crime of criminal use of a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-216 (a), but the court vacated the verdict as to that count, and the charge was dismissed. 2 The defendant’s father was sixty-nine years old. 3 The Hamden police officer in charge of the SWAT team, Captain John Lnjick, explained that a “perimeter” is a “containment area ... to keep whatever the problem is within that area”; the team did not want anyone to get out of that area because “a mobile hostage situation is much worse tha	5	1999–2019
California v. Tyberg green scotus · 1986 2 sentences 2019In rendering its judgment of conviction, the trial court vacated the convictions of manslaughter and burglary in the first degree pursuant to State v. Polanco, 308 Conn. 242 , 255, 61 A.3d 1084 (2013). 9 The Appellate Court rejected the defendant’s other claims on appeal, namely, that (1) the trial court improperly admitted a tape-recorded state- ment of a witness pursuant to State v. Whelan, 200 Conn. 743, 753 , 513 A.2d 86 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 994 , 107 S. Ct. 597 , 93 L. 2011In this opinion the other judges concurred. 1 The defendant had also been found guilty of the crime of criminal use of a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-216 (a), but the court vacated the verdict as to that count, and the charge was dismissed. 2 The defendant’s father was sixty-nine years old. 3 The Hamden police officer in charge of the SWAT team, Captain John Lnjick, explained that a “perimeter” is a “containment area ... to keep whatever the problem is within that area”; the team did not want anyone to get out of that area because “a mobile hostage situation is much worse tha	5	1999–2019
Doyle v. Ohio green scotus · 1976 2 sentences 2002The defendant, Daniel Santiago, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-55 (a) (1) and 53a-55a (a), 1 and assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-59 (a) (l). 2 On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court (1) improperly permitted the prosecutor to engage in misconduct during cross-examination of the defendant and in closing argument, which deprived the defendant of a fair trial, (2) incorrectly found certain essential facts in denying his m 2002The defendant, Daniel Santiago, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-55 (a) (1) and 53a-55a (a), 1 and assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-59 (a) (l). 2 On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court (1) improperly permitted the prosecutor to engage in misconduct during cross-examination of the defendant and in closing argument, which deprived the defendant of a fair trial, (2) incorrectly found certain essential facts in denying his m	4	2002–2025
McCoy v. Louisiana green scotus · 2018 2 sentences 2022The petitioner claims that the habeas court incorrectly determined that (1) McCoy v. Louisiana, U.S. , 138 S. Ct. 1500 , 200 L. 2022The petitioner claims that the habeas court incorrectly determined that (1) McCoy v. Louisiana, U.S. , 138 S. Ct. 1500 , 200 L.	2	2022–2022
State v. Solman green conn · 2002 2 sentences 2011State v. Solman, 67 Conn. App. 235, 236 , 786 A.2d 1184 (2001), cert. denied, 259 Conn. 917 , 791 A.2d 568 (2002). 2007State v. Solman, 67 Conn. App. 235 , 786 A.2d 1184 (2001), cert. denied, 259 Conn. 917 , 791 A.2d 568 (2002).	2	2007–2011
Statewide Grievance Committee v. Brown green conn · 2002 2 sentences 2011State v. Solman, 67 Conn. App. 235, 236 , 786 A.2d 1184 (2001), cert. denied, 259 Conn. 917 , 791 A.2d 568 (2002). 2007State v. Solman, 67 Conn. App. 235 , 786 A.2d 1184 (2001), cert. denied, 259 Conn. 917 , 791 A.2d 568 (2002).	2	2007–2011
State v. Solman green connappct · 2001 2 sentences 2011State v. Solman, 67 Conn. App. 235, 236 , 786 A.2d 1184 (2001), cert. denied, 259 Conn. 917 , 791 A.2d 568 (2002). 2011State v. Solman, 67 Conn. App. 235, 236 , 786 A.2d 1184 (2001), cert. denied, 259 Conn. 917 , 791 A.2d 568 (2002).	2	2007–2011
State v. Dash green conn · 1997 2 sentences 2008The trial court subsequently vacated this conviction in light of our Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Dash, 242 Conn. 143, 146-50 , 698 A.2d 297 (1997) (§ 53-202k is sentence enhancement provision and not separate crime). 2 On direct appeal, the petitioner claimed that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress evidence obtained following the stop of his motor vehicle, admitted into evidence clothing that the police had seized without a warrant, denied his motion to suppress oral statements that he made to the police and denied his motion to suppress items the police seized f 2008The trial court subsequently vacated this conviction in light of our Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Dash, 242 Conn. 143, 146-50 , 698 A.2d 297 (1997) (§ 53-202k is sentence enhancement provision and not separate crime). 2 On direct appeal, the petitioner claimed that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress evidence obtained following the stop of his motor vehicle, admitted into evidence clothing that the police had seized without a warrant, denied his motion to suppress oral statements that he made to the police and denied his motion to suppress items the police seized f	2	1998–2008
Lynch v. Granby Holdings, Inc. green conn · 1994 2 sentences 1995Practice Book § 829 provides: “The judicial authority may, upon his own motion or the motion of any party, order that two or more indictments or informations or both, whether against the same defendant or different defendants, be tried together.” The parties were ordered to file supplemental briefs to address the following inquiries: “(1) is the crime of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55a a lesser included offense of the crime of murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54a as charged in the information in light of the doctrine of St 1995Practice Book § 829 provides: “The judicial authority may, upon his own motion or the motion of any party, order that two or more indictments or informations or both, whether against the same defendant or different defendants, be tried together.” The parties were ordered to file supplemental briefs to address the following inquiries: “(1) is the crime of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55a a lesser included offense of the crime of murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54a as charged in the information in light of the doctrine of St	2	1995–1995
State v. Whistnant green conn · 1980 2 sentences 1995Practice Book § 829 provides: “The judicial authority may, upon his own motion or the motion of any party, order that two or more indictments or informations or both, whether against the same defendant or different defendants, be tried together.” The parties were ordered to file supplemental briefs to address the following inquiries: “(1) is the crime of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55a a lesser included offense of the crime of murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54a as charged in the information in light of the doctrine of St 1995Practice Book § 829 provides: “The judicial authority may, upon his own motion or the motion of any party, order that two or more indictments or informations or both, whether against the same defendant or different defendants, be tried together.” The parties were ordered to file supplemental briefs to address the following inquiries: “(1) is the crime of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55a a lesser included offense of the crime of murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54a as charged in the information in light of the doctrine of St	2	1995–1995
Taylor v. Commissioner of Correction neutral connappct · 2022 1 sentence 2026The peti- tioner subsequently pleaded guilty to attempt to commit assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-59 regarding the Maple Street shooting and to reckless endangerment in the first degree in violation of 1 “Because this appeal arises from the habeas court’s ruling dismissing the petition on the basis that the court lacked jurisdiction, we [assume] the facts [as] alleged in the petition, including those facts necessarily implied from the allegations, construing them in favor of the petitioner for the purposes of deciding whether the court had subject matter juri	1	2026–2026
Blockburger v. United States green scotus · 1931 2 sentences 2026II The defendant next claims that his convictions of home invasion in violation of § 53a-100aa (a) (2) and assault in the first degree with a firearm in violation of § 53a-59 (a) (5) violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy because those charges arose from the same act State v. Christon M. or transaction and constitute the same offense under Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304 , 52 S. Ct. 180 , 76 L. 2026II The defendant next claims that his convictions of home invasion in violation of § 53a-100aa (a) (2) and assault in the first degree with a firearm in violation of § 53a-59 (a) (5) violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy because those charges arose from the same act State v. Christon M. or transaction and constitute the same offense under Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304 , 52 S. Ct. 180 , 76 L.	1	2026–2026
State v. Matheney green conn · 2026 2 sentences 2026Page 54 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL February 17, 2026 232 FEBRUARY, 2026 354 Conn. 212 State v. Matheney of murder: intentional manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of §§ 53a-55a (a) and 53a-55 (a) (1), reckless indifference manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of §§ 53a-55a (a) and 53a-55 (a) (3), and reckless manslaughter in the second degree with a firearm in violation of § 53a-55a (a) and General Statutes § 53a-56 (a) (1). 2026Page 60 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL February 17, 2026 238 FEBRUARY, 2026 354 Conn. 212 State v. Matheney B The defendant claims that there was insufficient evi- dence to establish that he acted with the specific intent necessary to support his conviction of intentional man- slaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of §§ 53a-55a (a) and 53a-55 (a) (1).	1	2026–2026
State v. Anthony V. green conn · 2026 2 sentences 2026A jury found the defendant, Anthony V., guilty of manslaughter in the first degree March 3, 2026 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL Page 5 354 Conn. 255 MARCH, 2026 257 State v. Anthony V. with a firearm in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-55 (a) (3) and 53a-55a (a), in connection with an incident in which he shot the victim, his girlfriend, in the head with a revolver. 2026Page 10 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL March 3, 2026 262 MARCH, 2026 354 Conn. 255 State v. Anthony V. “a defendant is entitled to have the jury correctly and adequately instructed on the pertinent principles of sub- stantive law.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Blaine, supra, 334 Conn. 308 .	1	2026–2026
State v. Thompson green conn · 2003 2 sentences 2025In 2000, the petitioner was convicted, following a jury trial, ‘‘of reckless manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Stat- utes §§ 53a-55 (a) (3) and 53a-55a.’’4 State v. Thompson, 69 Conn. App. 299, 302 , 797 A.2d 539 (2002), rev’d, 266 Conn. 440 , 832 A.2d 626 (2003). 2025In 2000, the petitioner was convicted, following a jury trial, ‘‘of reckless manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Stat- utes §§ 53a-55 (a) (3) and 53a-55a.’’4 State v. Thompson, 69 Conn. App. 299, 302 , 797 A.2d 539 (2002), rev’d, 266 Conn. 440 , 832 A.2d 626 (2003).	1	2025–2025
State v. Thompson green connappct · 2002 2 sentences 2025In 2000, the petitioner was convicted, following a jury trial, ‘‘of reckless manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Stat- utes §§ 53a-55 (a) (3) and 53a-55a.’’4 State v. Thompson, 69 Conn. App. 299, 302 , 797 A.2d 539 (2002), rev’d, 266 Conn. 440 , 832 A.2d 626 (2003). 2025In 2000, the petitioner was convicted, following a jury trial, ‘‘of reckless manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Stat- utes §§ 53a-55 (a) (3) and 53a-55a.’’4 State v. Thompson, 69 Conn. App. 299, 302 , 797 A.2d 539 (2002), rev’d, 266 Conn. 440 , 832 A.2d 626 (2003).	1	2025–2025
State v. Leach neutral conn · 2016 1 sentence 2022State v. Leach, 165 Conn. App. 28 , 29?31, 138 A.3d 445 , cert. denied, 323 Conn. 948 , 169 A.3d 792 (2016).	1	2022–2022
In re Angeles green conn · 2016	1	2022–2022
State v. Leach neutral connappct · 2016	1	2022–2022
State v. Robinson green connappct · 2010	1	2021–2021
Morton v. Commissioner of Correction green conn · 2005	1	2021–2021
State v. Coltherst green connappct · 2005	1	2021–2021
Santiago v. Commissioner of Correction green conn · 2011	1	2021–2021
Young v. GIANETTI green conn · 2011	1	2021–2021
Rubel v. Wainwright green conn · 2005	1	2021–2021
Brady v. Maryland green scotus · 1963	1	2020–2020
State v. Dickson green conn · 2016	1	2020–2020
State v. Purcell green conn · 2019	1	2020–2020
Verdin-Garcia v. United States green scotus · 2017	1	2020–2020
Connecticut v. Dickson green scotus · 2017	1	2020–2020
State v. Fiocchi green connappct · 1989	1	2019–2019
State v. Holbrook green connappct · 2006	1	2019–2019
State v. Galarza green conn · 2006	1	2019–2019
State v. Culver green conn · 2006	1	2019–2019
State v. Bradley green conn · 2010	1	2018–2018
State v. Mendoza green conn · 2010	1	2018–2018

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-217 (39) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-54a (37) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-59 (26) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-49 (21) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-48 (20) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-55a (20) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 29-35 (19) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-55 (18) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 51-199 (15) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-3 (15) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-202k (13) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-134 (13)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CT 90 (1977–2026) CA 61 (1967–2026) VA 50 (1994–2026) IL 22 (2005–2025) PA 21 (1974–2026) OH 21 (1993–2025) FL 19 (1982–2025) WA 17 (1983–2026) NY 11 (1987–2025) TX 10 (1976–2021) MA 10 (2003–2018) GA 8 (1977–2021) LA 8 (1979–2024) IA 7 (2016–2024) NM 5 (1981–2018) KS 4 (1977–2004) VI 4 (2011–2016) WI 4 (1992–2023) IN 4 (2002–2015) NJ 3 (1976–2017) NC 3 (1974–2025) MO 3 (2012–2021) MI 3 (2012–2016) MS 3 (2016–2021) AK 2 (1987–2024) HI 2 (1999–2025) UT 2 (1991–2019) TN 2 (1992–2015) AZ 2 (2000–2014) VT 2 (1993–2018) AL 2 (2015–2023)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check