State v. Garvin

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Garvin

686 A.2d 126, 239 Conn. 950, 1996 Conn. LEXIS 502

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided December 4, 1996·No. SC 15578·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 43 Conn. App. 142 (AC 15092), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the defendant’s conviction for two counts of failure to appear arising from a single act did not violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy?

“2. Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the defendant’s due process rights were not violated by the enforcement of an illusory plea agreement with the sentencing court?”

[951] Decided December 4, 1996 Donald D. Dakers, special public defender, in support of the petition. Paul J. Ferencek, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

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, 43 Conn. App. 142 (AC 15092), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the defendant’s conviction for two counts of failure to appear arising from a single act did not violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy?

“2. Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the defendant’s due process rights were not violated by the enforcement of an illusory plea agreement with the sentencing court?”

[951] Decided December 4, 1996 Donald D. Dakers, special public defender, in support of the petition. Paul J. Ferencek, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

State v. Garvin, 686 A.2d 126, 239 Conn. 950, 1996 Conn. LEXIS 502 (Colo. 1996).

Pincite

686 A.2d 126 (State v. Garvin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related