Home/Connecticut Appellate Court/State v. Leduc

State v. Leduc

690 A.2d 1390, 44 Conn. App. 744, 1997 Conn. App. LEXIS 153
Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided April 15, 1997·No. 16044·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In accordance with our remand in State v. Leduc, 40 Conn. App. 233, 670 A.2d 1309 (1996), the trial court conducted an in camera inspection of the department of children and families file and found that the file does not contain (1) exculpatory evidence, (2) information material and favorable to the defense, (3) favorable evidence that might have led the jury to entertain a reasonable doubt about guilt, (4) information that probably would have changed the outcome of the trial, or (5) any evidence that is material and favorable to the defendant’s case.

Our in camera review of the department file leads us to conclude that the court on remand properly found that the file contained no evidence that was favorable and material to the defendant. In its review, the trial [745] court fully complied with the directive of this court by our remand and properly affirmed the judgment.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

State v. Leduc, 690 A.2d 1390, 44 Conn. App. 744, 1997 Conn. App. LEXIS 153 (Colo. Ct. App. 1997).

690 A.2d 1390 (State v. Leduc) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Richard W.
971 A.2d 810 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2009)
State v. Wright
969 A.2d 827 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2009)
State v. McClelland
965 A.2d 586 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2009)
State v. Gonzalez
815 A.2d 1261 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2003)
State v. Whitfield
815 A.2d 233 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2003)
State v. William C.
801 A.2d 823 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2002)
State v. Olah
759 A.2d 548 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2000)
State v. Leduc
695 A.2d 541 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1997)