State v. Green

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Green

776 A.2d 1147, 256 Conn. 927, 2001 Conn. LEXIS 250

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided June 14, 2001·No. SC 16544·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 62 Conn. App. 217 (AC 18369), is granted, limited to the following issues:

[928] The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16544. KentDrager, senior assistant public defender, in support of the petition. Denise B. Smoker, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition. Decided June 14, 2001

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court’s instruction, limiting the jury’s use of the evidence regarding the effect of Leroy Townsend’s use of marijuana on his credibility, was proper?

“2. If the answer to question one is ‘no,’ was the error harmless?”

NORCOTT, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

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, 62 Conn. App. 217 (AC 18369), is granted, limited to the following issues:

[928] The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16544. KentDrager, senior assistant public defender, in support of the petition. Denise B. Smoker, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition. Decided June 14, 2001

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court’s instruction, limiting the jury’s use of the evidence regarding the effect of Leroy Townsend’s use of marijuana on his credibility, was proper?

“2. If the answer to question one is ‘no,’ was the error harmless?”

NORCOTT, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.

State v. Green, 776 A.2d 1147, 256 Conn. 927, 2001 Conn. LEXIS 250 (Colo. 2001).

Pincite

776 A.2d 1147 (State v. Green) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related