State v. Brooks

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Brooks

355 A.2d 67, 167 Conn. 281, 1974 Conn. LEXIS 746

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided October 22, 1974·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam.

The defendant, Philip Brooks, was

convicted in a jury trial of a sale of narcotics in violation of § 19-480 (a) of the General Statutes. He has appealed from the judgment rendered.

The sole ground of appeal briefed by the defendant was the claim that the court erred in refusing to instruct the jury that possession of heroin was a lesser included offense of the crime of sale of heroin. Of necessity, the defendant admits that unless this court reverses its decision in State v. Brown, 163 Conn. 52, 301 A.2d 547, he cannot prevail on this appeal. We adhere to our previous decision in State v. Brown, supra.

There is no error.

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

Pee Curiam.

The defendant, Philip Brooks, was

convicted in a jury trial of a sale of narcotics in violation of § 19-480 (a) of the General Statutes. He has appealed from the judgment rendered.

The sole ground of appeal briefed by the defendant was the claim that the court erred in refusing to instruct the jury that possession of heroin was a lesser included offense of the crime of sale of heroin. Of necessity, the defendant admits that unless this court reverses its decision in State v. Brown, 163 Conn. 52, 301 A.2d 547, he cannot prevail on this appeal. We adhere to our previous decision in State v. Brown, supra.

There is no error.

State v. Brooks, 355 A.2d 67, 167 Conn. 281, 1974 Conn. LEXIS 746 (Colo. 1974).

Pincite

355 A.2d 67 (State v. Brooks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related