Parham v. Bronson

526 A.2d 1351, 11 Conn. App. 807, 1987 Conn. App. LEXIS 994
CourtConnecticut Appellate Court
DecidedJune 12, 1987
Docket5709
StatusPublished

This text of 526 A.2d 1351 (Parham v. Bronson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Appellate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Parham v. Bronson, 526 A.2d 1351, 11 Conn. App. 807, 1987 Conn. App. LEXIS 994 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff appeals from the judgment of the court denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The plaintiff claimed at the habeas hearing that he had been illegally sentenced in violation of a plea agreement he had entered into with the state’s attorney. Whether such a plea agreement existed was a [808]*808question of fact to be determined by the habeas court. The court found that the defendant failed to prove the existence of any such agreement. This finding is supported by the record and is not clearly erroneous. Practice Book § 4061; State v. Stepney, 191 Conn. 233, 239, 464 A.2d 758 (1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1084, 104 S. Ct. 1455, 79 L. Ed. 2d 772 (1984).

There is no error.

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

Related

State v. Stepney
464 A.2d 758 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
526 A.2d 1351, 11 Conn. App. 807, 1987 Conn. App. LEXIS 994, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parham-v-bronson-connappct-1987.