George M. v. Commissioner of Correction

Supreme Court of Connecticut

George M. v. Commissioner of Correction

928 A.2d 537, 283 Conn. 910, 2007 Conn. LEXIS 326

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided July 17, 2007·No. SC 17941·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The respondent’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 101 Conn. App. 52 (AC 26961), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“(1) Whether the Appellate Court improperly-reversed the trial court’s decision which held that a sentenced prisoner whose dates of offense were identified as 1993-1995’ was not entitled to have statutory good time credits applied to his sentence as such credit is not available for offenses committed on or after October 1, 1994?

“(2) Whether the Appellate Court incorrectly held that good time statutes are penal in nature and, as such, the rule of lenity applies to their interpretation?”

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The respondent’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 101 Conn. App. 52 (AC 26961), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“(1) Whether the Appellate Court improperly-reversed the trial court’s decision which held that a sentenced prisoner whose dates of offense were identified as 1993-1995’ was not entitled to have statutory good time credits applied to his sentence as such credit is not available for offenses committed on or after October 1, 1994?

“(2) Whether the Appellate Court incorrectly held that good time statutes are penal in nature and, as such, the rule of lenity applies to their interpretation?”

George M. v. Commissioner of Correction, 928 A.2d 537, 283 Conn. 910, 2007 Conn. LEXIS 326 (Colo. 2007).

Pincite

928 A.2d 537 (George M. v. Commissioner of Correction) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related