Home/Supreme Court of Connecticut/State v. Frye

State v. Frye

603 A.2d 749, 221 Conn. 917, 1992 Conn. LEXIS 104
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedMarch 5, 1992
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 603 A.2d 749 (State v. Frye) 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. Frye, 603 A.2d 749, 221 Conn. 917, 1992 Conn. LEXIS 104 (Colo. 1992).

Opinion

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 26 Conn. App. 472, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendant’s request for hybrid representation did [918]*918not require a proper canvass regarding waiver of his right to counsel?

Decided March 5, 1992 Neal Cone, assistant public defender, in support of the petition. Frederick W. Fawcett, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

“2. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendant’s exception to the trial court’s jury instructions, regarding the absence of a limiting instruction on the defendant’s criminal record, was inadequate to preserve that issue for appeal?”

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

Related

Cucuel v. Fayed, No. Cv94 31 54 20 (Apr. 7, 1995)
1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 3662 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1995)
Cucuel v. Fayed, No. Cv94 31 54 20 (Mar. 28, 1995)
1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 2947 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1995)
State v. Frye
617 A.2d 1382 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
603 A.2d 749, 221 Conn. 917, 1992 Conn. LEXIS 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-frye-conn-1992.