State v. Dinoto

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Dinoto

632 A.2d 697, 227 Conn. 921, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 320

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedSeptember 15, 1993

DocketSC 14823

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 632 A.2d 697 (State v. Dinoto) 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. Dinoto, 632 A.2d 697, 227 Conn. 921, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 320 (Colo. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

The state of Connecticut’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 32 Conn. App. 217 (AC 10665), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Under the facts of this case, did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court’s jury instruction regarding sexual assault in the first degree was incorrect because it referred to compelled sexual intercourse by threat of force?

“2. If the answer to question 1. is yes, was reversal of the conviction required by (a) the federal due process clause; or (b) the due process clause of article first, § 8, of the Connecticut constitution?

“3. Was the Appellate Court correct in failing to consider whether any error in the trial court’s instruction was harmless?”

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

The state of Connecticut’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 32 Conn. App. 217 (AC 10665), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Under the facts of this case, did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court’s jury instruction regarding sexual assault in the first degree was incorrect because it referred to compelled sexual intercourse by threat of force?

“2. If the answer to question 1. is yes, was reversal of the conviction required by (a) the federal due process clause; or (b) the due process clause of article first, § 8, of the Connecticut constitution?

“3. Was the Appellate Court correct in failing to consider whether any error in the trial court’s instruction was harmless?”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

632 A.2d 697, 227 Conn. 921, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-dinoto-conn-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack