State v. Brocuglio

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Brocuglio

782 A.2d 1247, 258 Conn. 908, 2001 Conn. LEXIS 401

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedSeptember 20, 2001

DocketSC 16590

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 782 A.2d 1247 (State v. Brocuglio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Brocuglio, 782 A.2d 1247, 258 Conn. 908, 2001 Conn. LEXIS 401 (Colo. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

The petition by the state of Connecticut for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 64 Conn. App. 93 (AC 18520), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendant’s conduct did not dissipate the taint from the police officers’ illegal entry into the backyard of the [909]*909defendant’s home, and that, therefore, the exclusionary rule regarding the suppression of the evidence derives from that entry?”

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16590. Mitchell S. Brody, assistant state’s attorney, in support of the petition. Jon L. Schoenhom, in opposition. Decided September 20, 2001

SULLIVAN, C. J., and VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

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

The petition by the state of Connecticut for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 64 Conn. App. 93 (AC 18520), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendant’s conduct did not dissipate the taint from the police officers’ illegal entry into the backyard of the [909]*909defendant’s home, and that, therefore, the exclusionary rule regarding the suppression of the evidence derives from that entry?”

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16590. Mitchell S. Brody, assistant state’s attorney, in support of the petition. Jon L. Schoenhom, in opposition. Decided September 20, 2001

SULLIVAN, C. J., and VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

782 A.2d 1247, 258 Conn. 908, 2001 Conn. LEXIS 401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-brocuglio-conn-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack