State v. ELECK
30 A.3d 2, 302 Conn. 945
Opinion
STATE of Connecticut
v.
Robert ELECK.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
William B. Westcott, in support of the petition.
Timothy F. Costello, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.
The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 130 Conn.App. 632, 23 A.3d 818, is granted, limited to the following issue:
"Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Facebook messages purportedly sent by a witness were inadmissible because they lacked sufficient authentication?"
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. ELECK, 30 A.3d 2, 302 Conn. 945 (Colo. 2011).
30 A.3d 2 (State v. ELECK) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Walcott v. Commissioner of Correction
Connecticut Appellate Court, 2026
In re Madison C.
Connecticut Appellate Court, 2022
Mitchell v. State
338 Conn. 66 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2021)
State v. Sayles
Connecticut Appellate Court, 2021
Ellen S. v. Katlyn F.
167 A.3d 1182 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2017)
Lawrence v. Cords
139 A.3d 778 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2016)
Chadwick St. Louis v. Commissioner of Correction
Connecticut Appellate Court, 2015
Handsome, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Commission
Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2015
State v. Eleck
Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2014
Smigelski v. Dubois
Connecticut Appellate Court, 2014
State v. Sabato
Connecticut Appellate Court, 2014
State v. St. Louis
76 A.3d 753 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2013)
State v. Kantorowski
72 A.3d 1228 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2013)