Appellate Law

News

Defendant Challenges School Zone Crack Arrest

  •      
    • Subscription Required
Tuesday, October 30, 2012  |  by CHRISTIAN NOLAN

Summary: A man convicted of selling crack cocaine in a school zone is arguing that the prosecutor needed to prove that the actual drug exchange took place within 1,500 feet of the school, not that the parties met or discussed the transaction somewhere within the 1,500 feet.

Decision

O'Brien v. O'Brien

  •      
    • Subscription Required
Monday, October 22, 2012

As stated in the 2009 Connecticut Appellate Court case of Collins v. Collins, "[w]hen, during the pendency of an appeal, events have occurred that preclude an appellate court from granting any practical relief through its disposition of the merits, a case has become moot."

Decision

State v. Brescia

  •      
    • Subscription Required
Monday, October 22, 2012

Certification was improvidently granted in this appeal to determine whether the Appellate Court properly concluded that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the defendant's motion filed under Practice Book §43-22 to correct an illegal sentence imposed after a summary criminal contempt proceeding pursuant to C.G.S. §51-33.

Decision

Acadia Insurance Company v. O'Reilly

  •      
    • Subscription Required
Monday, October 8, 2012

The defendants' failure to file their motion to open a default judgment within 20 days of the notice of judgment precluded review of any claim pertaining to the entry of the default judgment on appeal.

Decision

Santoro v. Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority

  •      
    • Subscription Required
Monday, September 24, 2012

The 20-day appeals period in which to file an appeal of a decision of a workers' compensation commissioner to the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority can be tolled, if one of the parties files a timely motion to correct.

Decision

Murphy v. EAPWJP, LLC

  •      
    • Subscription Required
Monday, September 17, 2012

It is well established that a claim must be distinctly raised at trial to be preserved for appeal.

News

Defense Experts Can Question Eyewitness Testimony

Friday, August 24, 2012  |  by CHRISTIAN NOLAN

According to some scientific studies, what a person believes he or she is seeing during a high-stress situation - such as a shooting or robbery - may not be accurate. Following a state Supreme Court ruling, it appears that significantly more of that type of testimony will take place in Connecticut criminal courts.

Decision

Lucarelli v. Freedom of Information Commission

  •      
    • Subscription Required
Monday, July 9, 2012

As the appellant, it was the plaintiff's burden to provide the Appellate Court with an adequate record to review his claims on appeal.

Decision

Morgan v. Morgan

  •      
    • Subscription Required
Monday, July 2, 2012

In its 2004 decision in Gianetti v. Meszoros, the Connecticut Supreme Court determined that where the trial court did not determine the rate of prejudgment interest to be awarded pursuant to C.G.S. §37-3a, the appeal was not taken from a final judgment.

Decision

Malaguit v. Ski Sundown, Inc.

  •      
    • Subscription Required
Monday, July 2, 2012

In its 2011 decision in Crews v. Pudlinski, the Connecticut Appellate Court explained that "in a case in which the general verdict rule operates, if any ground for the verdict is proper, the verdict must stand; only if every ground is improper does the verdict fall..." At age 15, James Malaguit went to a ski area owned and operated by Ski Sundown, Inc.