44 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1985–2021 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Franks v. Delawaregreen2 sentences2014The court deter- mined that Arconti did not render deficient perfor- mance because, following a Franks hearing regarding the admissibility of the videotape; see Franks v. Dela- ware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S. Ct. 2674 , 57 L. 2014The court deter- mined that Arconti did not render deficient perfor- mance because, following a Franks hearing regarding the admissibility of the videotape; see Franks v. Dela- ware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S. Ct. 2674 , 57 L. | 4 | 16 |
State v. Fergusongreen2 sentences2021As our Supreme Court has explained, before a defendant is entitled to a Franks hearing, the defendant must (1) make a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement knowingly and intention- ally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included by the affiant in the warrant affidavit; and (2) show that the allegedly false statement is necessary to a finding of probable cause.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Crespo, 190 Conn. App. 639, 651 , 211 A.3d 1027 (2019); see also State v. Ferguson, 260 Conn. 339 , 363–64, 796 A.2d 118 (2002). 2021As our Supreme Court has explained, before a defendant is entitled to a Franks hearing, the defendant must (1) make a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement knowingly and intention- ally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included by the affiant in the warrant affidavit; and (2) show that the allegedly false statement is necessary to a finding of probable cause.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Crespo, 190 Conn. App. 639, 651 , 211 A.3d 1027 (2019); see also State v. Ferguson, 260 Conn. 339 , 363–64, 796 A.2d 118 (2002). | 3 | 5 |
State v. Altayebgreen2 sentences2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). 2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). | 2 | 2 |
State v. William L.green2 sentences2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). 2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Knightgreen2 sentences2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). 2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Glenngreen2 sentences2007We conclude that the trial court reasonably denied the defendant a Franks hearing, and because we recently adopted the Franks standard as a matter of state constitutional law; see State v. Glenn, 251 Conn. 567, 578 , 740 A.2d 856 (1999); in the absence of a compelling reason to revisit our holding in Glenn , we reject the defendant’s alternative claim. 7 “In Franks v. Delaware, supra, [438 U.S.] 155-56, the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant may challenge the truthfulness of an affidavit supporting a search warrant, provided the defendant has made a ‘substantial preliminary show 2007We conclude that the trial court reasonably denied the defendant a Franks hearing, and because we recently adopted the Franks standard as a matter of state constitutional law; see State v. Glenn, 251 Conn. 567, 578 , 740 A.2d 856 (1999); in the absence of a compelling reason to revisit our holding in Glenn , we reject the defendant’s alternative claim. 7 “In Franks v. Delaware, supra, [438 U.S.] 155-56, the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant may challenge the truthfulness of an affidavit supporting a search warrant, provided the defendant has made a ‘substantial preliminary show | 2 | 2 |
State v. Bergingreen2 sentences2021Stated differently, ‘‘before a defendant is entitled to a Franks hearing for an alleged omission, he must make a substantial preliminary showing that the information was (1) omitted with the intent to make, or in reckless disregard of whether it made, the affidavit misleading to the issuing judge, and (2) material to the determina- tion of probable cause.’’ State v. Bergin, 214 Conn. 657 , 666–67, 574 A.2d 164 (1990). 2021Stated differently, ‘‘before a defendant is entitled to a Franks hearing for an alleged omission, he must make a substantial preliminary showing that the information was (1) omitted with the intent to make, or in reckless disregard of whether it made, the affidavit misleading to the issuing judge, and (2) material to the determina- tion of probable cause.’’ State v. Bergin, 214 Conn. 657 , 666–67, 574 A.2d 164 (1990). | 1 | 10 |
State v. Grantgreen2 sentences2015See State v. Grant, 286 Conn. 499, 520 , 944 A.2d 947 (defendant is entitled to Franks hearing to determine accuracy of facts included in affidavit where material fact was omitted with intent to make, or in reckless disregard of whether it made, affidavit misleading to issuing judge and omitted fact was material to determination of probable cause), cert. denied, 555 U.S. 916 , 129 S. Ct. 271 , 172 L. 2015See State v. Grant, 286 Conn. 499, 520 , 944 A.2d 947 (defendant is entitled to Franks hearing to determine accuracy of facts included in affidavit where material fact was omitted with intent to make, or in reckless disregard of whether it made, affidavit misleading to issuing judge and omitted fact was material to determination of probable cause), cert. denied, 555 U.S. 916 , 129 S. Ct. 271 , 172 L. | 1 | 3 |
Rivera v. Commissioner of Correctiongreen2 sentences2001"If the allegedly false statement is set aside, however, and there remains sufficient evidence to establish probable cause, a Franks hearing is not necessary." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Pappas , 256 Conn. 854 , 863 , 776 A.2d 1091 (2001). "[W]e have a longstanding rule that there is an underlying presumption of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Salvatore , 57 Conn. App. 396 , 402 , 749 A.2d 71 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 921 , 755 A.2d 216 (2000). 2001"If the allegedly false statement is set aside, however, and there remains sufficient evidence to establish probable cause, a Franks hearing is not necessary." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Pappas , 256 Conn. 854 , 863 , 776 A.2d 1091 (2001). "[W]e have a longstanding rule that there is an underlying presumption of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Salvatore , 57 Conn. App. 396 , 402 , 749 A.2d 71 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 921 , 755 A.2d 216 (2000). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Salvatoregreen2 sentences2001"If the allegedly false statement is set aside, however, and there remains sufficient evidence to establish probable cause, a Franks hearing is not necessary." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Pappas , 256 Conn. 854 , 863 , 776 A.2d 1091 (2001). "[W]e have a longstanding rule that there is an underlying presumption of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Salvatore , 57 Conn. App. 396 , 402 , 749 A.2d 71 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 921 , 755 A.2d 216 (2000). 2001"If the allegedly false statement is set aside, however, and there remains sufficient evidence to establish probable cause, a Franks hearing is not necessary." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Pappas , 256 Conn. 854 , 863 , 776 A.2d 1091 (2001). "[W]e have a longstanding rule that there is an underlying presumption of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Salvatore , 57 Conn. App. 396 , 402 , 749 A.2d 71 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 921 , 755 A.2d 216 (2000). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Salvatoregreen2 sentences2001"If the allegedly false statement is set aside, however, and there remains sufficient evidence to establish probable cause, a Franks hearing is not necessary." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Pappas , 256 Conn. 854 , 863 , 776 A.2d 1091 (2001). "[W]e have a longstanding rule that there is an underlying presumption of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Salvatore , 57 Conn. App. 396 , 402 , 749 A.2d 71 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 921 , 755 A.2d 216 (2000). 2001"If the allegedly false statement is set aside, however, and there remains sufficient evidence to establish probable cause, a Franks hearing is not necessary." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Pappas , 256 Conn. 854 , 863 , 776 A.2d 1091 (2001). "[W]e have a longstanding rule that there is an underlying presumption of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Salvatore , 57 Conn. App. 396 , 402 , 749 A.2d 71 , cert. denied, 253 Conn. 921 , 755 A.2d 216 (2000). | 1 | 2 |
| Russell v. Russellgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Russell v. Russellgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Gonzalezgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Glenn Dale Simkunas v. Michael Tardi and Robert Troygreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Rosariogreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Browngreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Colemangreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Leongreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Browngreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Durepogreen | 1 | 1 |
| David K. Guenther v. Mark Holmgreen and City of Black River Fallsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Church of Scientology of California v. Superior Court of Californiagreen | 1 | 1 |
| General Marine Transport Corp. v. O'Haregreen | 1 | 1 |
| Guenther v. Holmgreengreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. James Edward Colkley, United States of America v. Jamison Henry Johnsongreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Justgreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Mohan Mankani, Kenneth R. Norris, Joseph Fortin, Peter Christopher MacFarlane Sally Edithgreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. Kirk C. Reivichgreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. John H. Collinsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Telescagreen | 1 | 1 |
| United States v. James W. McDonaldgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Patterson
green
2 sentences2003Even if the defendant had sought and obtained a Franks hearing, and had been successful in persuading the court of the existence of a violation, such a finding alone would not have justified dismissal of the charges because “[a] Franks violation in an affidavit supporting an arrest warrant does not entitle a defendant to the dismissal of the charges for which he was arrested.” State v. Patterson, 213 Conn. 708, 715 , 570 A.2d 174 (1990). 2003Even if the defendant had sought and obtained a Franks hearing, and had been successful in persuading the court of the existence of a violation, such a finding alone would not have justified dismissal of the charges because “[a] Franks violation in an affidavit supporting an arrest warrant does not entitle a defendant to the dismissal of the charges for which he was arrested.” State v. Patterson, 213 Conn. 708, 715 , 570 A.2d 174 (1990). | 4 | 1990–2009 |
State v. Crespo
green
2 sentences2021As our Supreme Court has explained, before a defendant is entitled to a Franks hearing, the defendant must (1) make a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement knowingly and intention- ally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included by the affiant in the warrant affidavit; and (2) show that the allegedly false statement is necessary to a finding of probable cause.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Crespo, 190 Conn. App. 639, 651 , 211 A.3d 1027 (2019); see also State v. Ferguson, 260 Conn. 339 , 363–64, 796 A.2d 118 (2002). 2021As our Supreme Court has explained, before a defendant is entitled to a Franks hearing, the defendant must (1) make a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement knowingly and intention- ally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included by the affiant in the warrant affidavit; and (2) show that the allegedly false statement is necessary to a finding of probable cause.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Crespo, 190 Conn. App. 639, 651 , 211 A.3d 1027 (2019); see also State v. Ferguson, 260 Conn. 339 , 363–64, 796 A.2d 118 (2002). | 3 | 2019–2021 |
State v. Dolphin
green
2 sentences2014Ed. 2d 413 (1990).9 When reviewing a claim pursuant to a Franks hearing, ‘‘the [United States] Supreme Court has reaffirmed the longstanding rule that there is an underlying presump- tion of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant.’’ State v. Dolphin, 195 Conn. 444, 457 , 488 A.2d 812 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 833 , 106 S. Ct. 103 , 88 L. 2014Ed. 2d 413 (1990).9 When reviewing a claim pursuant to a Franks hearing, ‘‘the [United States] Supreme Court has reaffirmed the longstanding rule that there is an underlying presump- tion of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant.’’ State v. Dolphin, 195 Conn. 444, 457 , 488 A.2d 812 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 833 , 106 S. Ct. 103 , 88 L. | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Manzur v. McCotter
green
2 sentences2014Ed. 2d 413 (1990).9 When reviewing a claim pursuant to a Franks hearing, ‘‘the [United States] Supreme Court has reaffirmed the longstanding rule that there is an underlying presump- tion of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant.’’ State v. Dolphin, 195 Conn. 444, 457 , 488 A.2d 812 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 833 , 106 S. Ct. 103 , 88 L. 2014Ed. 2d 413 (1990).9 When reviewing a claim pursuant to a Franks hearing, ‘‘the [United States] Supreme Court has reaffirmed the longstanding rule that there is an underlying presump- tion of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant.’’ State v. Dolphin, 195 Conn. 444, 457 , 488 A.2d 812 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 833 , 106 S. Ct. 103 , 88 L. | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Gamez v. Texas
green
2 sentences2014Ed. 2d 413 (1990).9 When reviewing a claim pursuant to a Franks hearing, ‘‘the [United States] Supreme Court has reaffirmed the longstanding rule that there is an underlying presump- tion of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant.’’ State v. Dolphin, 195 Conn. 444, 457 , 488 A.2d 812 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 833 , 106 S. Ct. 103 , 88 L. 2014Ed. 2d 413 (1990).9 When reviewing a claim pursuant to a Franks hearing, ‘‘the [United States] Supreme Court has reaffirmed the longstanding rule that there is an underlying presump- tion of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant.’’ State v. Dolphin, 195 Conn. 444, 457 , 488 A.2d 812 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 833 , 106 S. Ct. 103 , 88 L. | 3 | 1990–2014 |
Chou v. Capital Cigar & Tobacco Co.
green
2 sentences2014Ed. 2d 413 (1990).9 When reviewing a claim pursuant to a Franks hearing, ‘‘the [United States] Supreme Court has reaffirmed the longstanding rule that there is an underlying presump- tion of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant.’’ State v. Dolphin, 195 Conn. 444, 457 , 488 A.2d 812 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 833 , 106 S. Ct. 103 , 88 L. 2014Ed. 2d 413 (1990).9 When reviewing a claim pursuant to a Franks hearing, ‘‘the [United States] Supreme Court has reaffirmed the longstanding rule that there is an underlying presump- tion of validity with respect to the affidavit supporting a warrant.’’ State v. Dolphin, 195 Conn. 444, 457 , 488 A.2d 812 , cert. denied, 474 U.S. 833 , 106 S. Ct. 103 , 88 L. | 3 | 1990–2014 |
State v. St. Louis
neutral
2 sentences2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). 2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Hirschfeld v. MACHINIST
green
2 sentences2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). 2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). | 2 | 2021–2021 |
State v. ELECK
green
2 sentences2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). 2021Louis, 128 Conn. App. 703, 711 , 18 A.3d 648 , cert. denied, 302 Conn. 945 , 30 A.3d 1 (2011); see also State v. Altayeb, 126 Conn. App. 383, 398 , 11 A.3d 1122 , cert. denied, 300 Conn. 927 , 15 A.3d 628 (2011). | 2 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Varela
green
2 sentences2020If the ensuing Franks hearing dis- closes either an intentional or reckless falsehood, the court must excise that material from the affidavit and judge the probable cause of the affidavit shorn of that material.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Therrien, 117 Conn. App. 256, 262 , 978 A.2d 556 , cert. denied, 294 Conn. 913 , 983 A.2d 275 (2009). 16 The motions stated in relevant part: ‘‘That the affidavit(s) in this case prepared and served by the constable . . . knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, made incomplete statements, ha 2011If the ensuing Franks hearing discloses either an intentional or reckless falsehood, the court must excise that material from the affidavit and judge the probable cause of the affidavit shorn of that material.” (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Therrien, 117 Conn. App. 256, 262 , 978 A.2d 556 , cert. denied, 294 Conn. 913 , 983 A.2d 275 (2009). 4 According to the affidavit, the defendant told Palermo that Petrozza turned the car over to him to satisfy a loan. 5 Palermo later testified at the defendant’s trial concerning the sale of the Audi. | 2 | 2011–2020 |
State v. Therrien
green
2 sentences2020If the ensuing Franks hearing dis- closes either an intentional or reckless falsehood, the court must excise that material from the affidavit and judge the probable cause of the affidavit shorn of that material.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Therrien, 117 Conn. App. 256, 262 , 978 A.2d 556 , cert. denied, 294 Conn. 913 , 983 A.2d 275 (2009). 16 The motions stated in relevant part: ‘‘That the affidavit(s) in this case prepared and served by the constable . . . knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, made incomplete statements, ha 2011If the ensuing Franks hearing discloses either an intentional or reckless falsehood, the court must excise that material from the affidavit and judge the probable cause of the affidavit shorn of that material.” (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Therrien, 117 Conn. App. 256, 262 , 978 A.2d 556 , cert. denied, 294 Conn. 913 , 983 A.2d 275 (2009). 4 According to the affidavit, the defendant told Palermo that Petrozza turned the car over to him to satisfy a loan. 5 Palermo later testified at the defendant’s trial concerning the sale of the Audi. | 2 | 2011–2020 |
State v. Therrien
green
2 sentences2020If the ensuing Franks hearing dis- closes either an intentional or reckless falsehood, the court must excise that material from the affidavit and judge the probable cause of the affidavit shorn of that material.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Therrien, 117 Conn. App. 256, 262 , 978 A.2d 556 , cert. denied, 294 Conn. 913 , 983 A.2d 275 (2009). 16 The motions stated in relevant part: ‘‘That the affidavit(s) in this case prepared and served by the constable . . . knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, made incomplete statements, ha 2020If the ensuing Franks hearing dis- closes either an intentional or reckless falsehood, the court must excise that material from the affidavit and judge the probable cause of the affidavit shorn of that material.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Therrien, 117 Conn. App. 256, 262 , 978 A.2d 556 , cert. denied, 294 Conn. 913 , 983 A.2d 275 (2009). 16 The motions stated in relevant part: ‘‘That the affidavit(s) in this case prepared and served by the constable . . . knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, made incomplete statements, ha | 2 | 2011–2020 |
State v. Bangulescu
green
2 sentences2019In State v. Bangulescu , 80 Conn. App. 26 , 832 A.2d 1187 , cert. denied, 267 Conn. 907 , 840 A.2d 1171 (2003), this court held that a defendant must distinctly raise a request for a Franks hearing before the trial court in order to preserve the claim for appellate review. 2019In State v. Bangulescu , 80 Conn. App. 26 , 832 A.2d 1187 , cert. denied, 267 Conn. 907 , 840 A.2d 1171 (2003), this court held that a defendant must distinctly raise a request for a Franks hearing before the trial court in order to preserve the claim for appellate review. | 2 | 2004–2019 |
State v. Pappas
green
2 sentences2011If the allegedly false statement is set aside, however, and there remains sufficient evidence to establish probable *711 cause, a Franks hearing is not necessary.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Pappas, 256 Conn. 854, 863 , 776 A.2d 1091 (2001). 2011If the allegedly false statement is set aside, however, and there remains sufficient evidence to establish probable *711 cause, a Franks hearing is not necessary.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Pappas, 256 Conn. 854, 863 , 776 A.2d 1091 (2001). | 2 | 2001–2011 |
Aguilar v. Texas
red
2 sentences1990Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S. Ct. 1509 , 12 L. 1990Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S. Ct. 1509 , 12 L. | 2 | 1986–1990 |
State v. Minor
green
2 sentences2019In State v. Bangulescu , 80 Conn. App. 26 , 832 A.2d 1187 , cert. denied, 267 Conn. 907 , 840 A.2d 1171 (2003), this court held that a defendant must distinctly raise a request for a Franks hearing before the trial court in order to preserve the claim for appellate review. 2019In State v. Bangulescu , 80 Conn. App. 26 , 832 A.2d 1187 , cert. denied, 267 Conn. 907 , 840 A.2d 1171 (2003), this court held that a defendant must distinctly raise a request for a Franks hearing before the trial court in order to preserve the claim for appellate review. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Lopez
green
2 sentences2019In State v. Bangulescu , 80 Conn. App. 26 , 832 A.2d 1187 , cert. denied, 267 Conn. 907 , 840 A.2d 1171 (2003), this court held that a defendant must distinctly raise a request for a Franks hearing before the trial court in order to preserve the claim for appellate review. 2019In State v. Bangulescu , 80 Conn. App. 26 , 832 A.2d 1187 , cert. denied, 267 Conn. 907 , 840 A.2d 1171 (2003), this court held that a defendant must distinctly raise a request for a Franks hearing before the trial court in order to preserve the claim for appellate review. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Maxwell v. State
green
2 sentences2015Ed. 2d 200 (2008). 9 But see Maxwell v. State, 259 Ark. 86, 92 , 531 S.W.2d 468 (1976) (‘‘[w]e unhesitatingly find that the mere fact that [the informant’s] statement was self-incriminating was an adequate basis for according reliability and credi- bility’’); Merrick v. State, 283 Md. 1, 16 , 389 A.2d 328 (1978) (‘‘the probable credibility of the informant here was sufficiently shown on the sole basis of his statements against his penal interest’’). 2015Ed. 2d 200 (2008). 9 But see Maxwell v. State, 259 Ark. 86, 92 , 531 S.W.2d 468 (1976) (‘‘[w]e unhesitatingly find that the mere fact that [the informant’s] statement was self-incriminating was an adequate basis for according reliability and credi- bility’’); Merrick v. State, 283 Md. 1, 16 , 389 A.2d 328 (1978) (‘‘the probable credibility of the informant here was sufficiently shown on the sole basis of his statements against his penal interest’’). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Merrick v. State
green
2 sentences2015Ed. 2d 200 (2008). 9 But see Maxwell v. State, 259 Ark. 86, 92 , 531 S.W.2d 468 (1976) (‘‘[w]e unhesitatingly find that the mere fact that [the informant’s] statement was self-incriminating was an adequate basis for according reliability and credi- bility’’); Merrick v. State, 283 Md. 1, 16 , 389 A.2d 328 (1978) (‘‘the probable credibility of the informant here was sufficiently shown on the sole basis of his statements against his penal interest’’). 2015Ed. 2d 200 (2008). 9 But see Maxwell v. State, 259 Ark. 86, 92 , 531 S.W.2d 468 (1976) (‘‘[w]e unhesitatingly find that the mere fact that [the informant’s] statement was self-incriminating was an adequate basis for according reliability and credi- bility’’); Merrick v. State, 283 Md. 1, 16 , 389 A.2d 328 (1978) (‘‘the probable credibility of the informant here was sufficiently shown on the sole basis of his statements against his penal interest’’). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| State v. Batts green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| State v. Mordowanec green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| Farina v. Florida green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| Reneau v. Cockrell, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| Stepney v. Connecticut green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Arizona v. Atchison green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Helton v. United States green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| United States v. Sanford I. Atkin green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| State v. Stepney green | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Batson v. Kentucky green | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| State v. Ruscoe green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| State v. Morrill green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| State v. Barton green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| Big Eagle v. United States green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| Rodriguez v. United States green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| Ruscoe v. Connecticut green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| State v. Rodriguez green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Copeland neutral | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| Golino v. City of New Haven green | 1 | 1994–1994 |
| State v. Laracuente green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| State v. Shifflett green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
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.