State v. Hall

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Hall

559 A.2d 1141, 211 Conn. 807, 1989 Conn. LEXIS 169

DecidedMay 11, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 559 A.2d 1141 (State v. Hall) 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. Hall, 559 A.2d 1141, 211 Conn. 807, 1989 Conn. LEXIS 169 (Colo. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

The State of Connecticut’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 17 Conn. App. 502, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court err in concluding that the trial court should not have instructed the jury that self-defense was not available as a defense to the lesser included offense of manslaughter in the second degree?

“2. Did the Appellate Court err in concluding that the determination of the jury that self-defense had been disproved beyond a reasonable doubt, implicit in its verdict that the defendant was guilty of manslaughter in the first degree, did not render harmless the failure to charge upon the availability of self-defense for manslaughter in the second degree?

“3. Where the defendant admitted shooting the victim at close range six times, claiming self-defense, did the Appellate Court err in holding that the defendant was entitled to an instruction on criminally negligent homicide as a lesser included offense?”

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, 17 Conn. App. 502, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court err in concluding that the trial court should not have instructed the jury that self-defense was not available as a defense to the lesser included offense of manslaughter in the second degree?

“2. Did the Appellate Court err in concluding that the determination of the jury that self-defense had been disproved beyond a reasonable doubt, implicit in its verdict that the defendant was guilty of manslaughter in the first degree, did not render harmless the failure to charge upon the availability of self-defense for manslaughter in the second degree?

“3. Where the defendant admitted shooting the victim at close range six times, claiming self-defense, did the Appellate Court err in holding that the defendant was entitled to an instruction on criminally negligent homicide as a lesser included offense?”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

559 A.2d 1141, 211 Conn. 807, 1989 Conn. LEXIS 169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hall-conn-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack