State v. Indrisano

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Indrisano

617 A.2d 168, 224 Conn. 914, 1992 Conn. LEXIS 401

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided October 30, 1992·No. SC 14631·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 283 (AC 10659), is granted, limited to the following questions:

“1. Was the Appellate Court correct in concluding that the record was insufficient, pursuant to State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (1989), to permit adequate appellate review of the defendant’s claims that, on its face and as applied, General Statutes § 53a-182 was void for vagueness under the state and federal constitutions?

“2. Is General Statutes § 53a-182 void for vagueness on its face and as applied to this case, under the state and federal constitutions?”

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, 29 Conn. App. 283 (AC 10659), is granted, limited to the following questions:

“1. Was the Appellate Court correct in concluding that the record was insufficient, pursuant to State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (1989), to permit adequate appellate review of the defendant’s claims that, on its face and as applied, General Statutes § 53a-182 was void for vagueness under the state and federal constitutions?

“2. Is General Statutes § 53a-182 void for vagueness on its face and as applied to this case, under the state and federal constitutions?”

State v. Indrisano, 617 A.2d 168, 224 Conn. 914, 1992 Conn. LEXIS 401 (Colo. 1992).

Pincite

617 A.2d 168 (State v. Indrisano) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related