State v. Holloway

598 A.2d 148, 26 Conn. App. 910, 1991 Conn. App. LEXIS 381
CourtConnecticut Appellate Court
DecidedOctober 29, 1991
Docket9868
StatusPublished

This text of 598 A.2d 148 (State v. Holloway) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Appellate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Holloway, 598 A.2d 148, 26 Conn. App. 910, 1991 Conn. App. LEXIS 381 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The state concedes that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to order the defendant’s property forfeited because of the state’s failure to initiate proper proceedings under the drug forfeiture statute. General Statutes § 54-36a et seq.

The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded with direction to grant the defendant’s motion for the return of the seized property.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
598 A.2d 148, 26 Conn. App. 910, 1991 Conn. App. LEXIS 381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-holloway-connappct-1991.