Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Connecticut opinions name it 2 courts 2010–2021 1 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Goregreen2 sentences2014In State v. Gore, supra, 288 Conn. 770 , our Supreme Court, employing its supervisory authority, adopted a rule that ‘‘in the future, when a defendant, personally or through counsel, indicates that he wishes to waive a jury trial in favor of a court trial in the absence of a signed written waiver by the defendant, the trial court should engage in a brief canvass of the defendant in order to ascertain that his or her personal waiver of the fundamental right to a jury trial is made knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily. . . . 2014In State v. Gore, supra, 288 Conn. 770 , our Supreme Court, employing its supervisory authority, adopted a rule that ‘‘in the future, when a defendant, personally or through counsel, indicates that he wishes to waive a jury trial in favor of a court trial in the absence of a signed written waiver by the defendant, the trial court should engage in a brief canvass of the defendant in order to ascertain that his or her personal waiver of the fundamental right to a jury trial is made knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily. . . . | 1 | 6 |
State v. Crumpgreen2 sentences2011See State v. Crump, 201 Conn. 489, 504-505 , 518 A.2d 378 (1986) (ruling that written waiver, even in absence of oral acknowledgment by defendant, constituted valid waiver of right to jury trial); cf. State v. Gore, 288 Conn. 770, 787-88 , 955 A.2d 1 (2008) (“when a defendant, personally or through counsel, indicates that he wishes to waive a jury trial in favor of a court trial in the absence of a signed written waiver by the defendant, the trial court should engage in a brief canvass of the defendant in order to ascertain that his or her personal waiver of the fundamental right to a jury tri 2011See State v. Crump, 201 Conn. 489, 504-505 , 518 A.2d 378 (1986) (ruling that written waiver, even in absence of oral acknowledgment by defendant, constituted valid waiver of right to jury trial); cf. State v. Gore, 288 Conn. 770, 787-88 , 955 A.2d 1 (2008) (“when a defendant, personally or through counsel, indicates that he wishes to waive a jury trial in favor of a court trial in the absence of a signed written waiver by the defendant, the trial court should engage in a brief canvass of the defendant in order to ascertain that his or her personal waiver of the fundamental right to a jury tri | 1 | 1 |
State v. Ubaldigreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., State v. Ubaldi, 190 Conn. 559, 572, 575 , 462 A.2d 1001 (supervisory power invoked to reverse judgment of conviction on basis of prosecutorial impropriety), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 916 , 104 S.Ct. 280 , 78 L.Ed.2d 259 (1983). 2010See, e.g., State v. Ubaldi, 190 Conn. 559, 572, 575 , 462 A.2d 1001 (supervisory power invoked to reverse judgment of conviction on basis of prosecutorial impropriety), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 916 , 104 S.Ct. 280 , 78 L.Ed.2d 259 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Ledbetterred2 sentences2010Thus, the supervisory power has been invoked in at least two circumstances: 1 (1) to announce a new rule of procedure that the court believes is necessary to protect the integrity of the judiciary; see, e.g., State v. Gore, 288 Conn. 770, 787-88 , 955 A.2d 1 (2008) (supervisory power invoked to adopt rule that “when a defendant . . . indicates that he wishes to waive a jury trial in favor of a court trial in the absence of a signed written waiver by the defendant, the trial court should engage in a brief canvass of the defendant in order to ascertain that his or her personal waiver of the fund 2010Thus, the supervisory power has been invoked in at least two circumstances: 1 (1) to announce a new rule of procedure that the court believes is necessary to protect the integrity of the judiciary; see, e.g., State v. Gore, 288 Conn. 770, 787-88 , 955 A.2d 1 (2008) (supervisory power invoked to adopt rule that “when a defendant . . . indicates that he wishes to waive a jury trial in favor of a court trial in the absence of a signed written waiver by the defendant, the trial court should engage in a brief canvass of the defendant in order to ascertain that his or her personal waiver of the fund | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Connecticut v. Ubaldi
green
2 sentences2010See, e.g., State v. Ubaldi, 190 Conn. 559, 572, 575 , 462 A.2d 1001 (supervisory power invoked to reverse judgment of conviction on basis of prosecutorial impropriety), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 916 , 104 S.Ct. 280 , 78 L.Ed.2d 259 (1983). 2010See, e.g., State v. Ubaldi, 190 Conn. 559, 572, 575 , 462 A.2d 1001 (supervisory power invoked to reverse judgment of conviction on basis of prosecutorial impropriety), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 916 , 104 S.Ct. 280 , 78 L.Ed.2d 259 (1983). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
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.
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.