State v. Breen

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

State v. Breen

673 A.2d 75, 1996 R.I. LEXIS 93, 1996 WL 146095

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedMarch 27, 1996

DocketNo. 95-597-C.A.

StatusPublished

This text of 673 A.2d 75 (State v. Breen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Breen, 673 A.2d 75, 1996 R.I. LEXIS 93, 1996 WL 146095 (R.I. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This case is here on the state’s appeal from a Superior Court judgment dismissing Information K3/94-542A which had charged defendant with a violation of the statute prohibiting “stalking” (§ 11-59-2). Since the issue of the constitutionality of this statute was before this court in State v. David J. Fonseca, 670 A.2d 1237 (R.E.1996) (Fonseca), on December 21, 1995, we granted the state’s motion to hold this appeal in abeyance pending our opinion in Fonseca. Fonseca was [76]*76decided on February 8, 1996, and the state now moves, pursuant to that opinion, for a reinstatement of the “stalking” charge against this defendant and for remand of the matter to the Superior Court for further proceedings in light of that opinion.

After careful consideration thereof, we hereby grant the state’s motion. The state’s appeal is sustained in light of State v. Fonse-ca, supra; the order appealed from is vacated; and the papers are remanded to the Superior Court for further proceedings.

MURRAY, J., did not participate.

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

ORDER

This case is here on the state’s appeal from a Superior Court judgment dismissing Information K3/94-542A which had charged defendant with a violation of the statute prohibiting “stalking” (§ 11-59-2). Since the issue of the constitutionality of this statute was before this court in State v. David J. Fonseca, 670 A.2d 1237 (R.E.1996) (Fonseca), on December 21, 1995, we granted the state’s motion to hold this appeal in abeyance pending our opinion in Fonseca. Fonseca was [76]*76decided on February 8, 1996, and the state now moves, pursuant to that opinion, for a reinstatement of the “stalking” charge against this defendant and for remand of the matter to the Superior Court for further proceedings in light of that opinion.

After careful consideration thereof, we hereby grant the state’s motion. The state’s appeal is sustained in light of State v. Fonse-ca, supra; the order appealed from is vacated; and the papers are remanded to the Superior Court for further proceedings.

MURRAY, J., did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

673 A.2d 75, 1996 R.I. LEXIS 93, 1996 WL 146095, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-breen-ri-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack