State v. Jimenez

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Jimenez

623 A.2d 1026, 225 Conn. 916, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 125

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedMarch 25, 1993

DocketSC 14737

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 623 A.2d 1026 (State v. Jimenez) 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. Jimenez, 623 A.2d 1026, 225 Conn. 916, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 125 (Colo. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 30 Conn. App. 406 (AC 11272), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“In a trial for assault in the first degree where the defense presented evidence that the defendant’s use of deadly physical force was based on his reasonable belief that the victim was about to use deadly physical force against him, and the trial court erroneously instructed the jury that notwithstanding the provisions of General Statutes § 53a-19 (a), a claim of self-defense [917]*917would be defeated if the defendant was the first person to use physical force, did the Appellate Court correctly conclude it was not reasonably possible for the jury to have been misled?”

Decided March 25, 1993 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 14737. Joseph G. Bruckmann, public defender, in support of the petition. Frederick W. Fawcett, 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, 30 Conn. App. 406 (AC 11272), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“In a trial for assault in the first degree where the defense presented evidence that the defendant’s use of deadly physical force was based on his reasonable belief that the victim was about to use deadly physical force against him, and the trial court erroneously instructed the jury that notwithstanding the provisions of General Statutes § 53a-19 (a), a claim of self-defense [917]*917would be defeated if the defendant was the first person to use physical force, did the Appellate Court correctly conclude it was not reasonably possible for the jury to have been misled?”

Decided March 25, 1993 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 14737. Joseph G. Bruckmann, public defender, in support of the petition. Frederick W. Fawcett, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

623 A.2d 1026, 225 Conn. 916, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jimenez-conn-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack