State v. Coleman

677 A.2d 1372, 237 Conn. 931, 1996 Conn. LEXIS 272

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided July 1, 1996·No. SC 15468·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 41 Conn. App. 255 (AC 12812), is granted, limited to the following isssues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court improperly disregard the state’s concession that, in this case, the defendant should not receive multiple punishment for his two burglary convictions?

“2. Whether, under our supervisory powers or the state constitution, we should adopt the presumption [932]*932set forth in North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 (1969), pertaining to the imposition of a greater sentence after having successfully attacked his first conviction?”

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 15468. Temmy Ann Pieszak, assistant public defender, in support of the petition. Harry Weller, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition. Decided July 1, 1996

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

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 41 Conn. App. 255 (AC 12812), is granted, limited to the following isssues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court improperly disregard the state’s concession that, in this case, the defendant should not receive multiple punishment for his two burglary convictions?

“2. Whether, under our supervisory powers or the state constitution, we should adopt the presumption [932]*932set forth in North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711 (1969), pertaining to the imposition of a greater sentence after having successfully attacked his first conviction?”

State v. Coleman, 677 A.2d 1372, 237 Conn. 931, 1996 Conn. LEXIS 272 (Colo. 1996).

Pincite

677 A.2d 1372 (State v. Coleman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

State v. Coleman

700 A.2d 14 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1997)

Opinion

Related