State v. Lewis

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Lewis

366 A.2d 804, 172 Conn. 694

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided December 7, 1976·Published

Opinion

It appearing that the defendant in the above-entitled case has failed to prosecute his appeal from the Superior Court for the judicial district of Waterbury with proper diligence, it is, under Prae[695] tice Book § 696, ordered by the Supreme Court, suo motu, that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed unless the defendant on or before December 28, 1976, files his brief.

Argued December 7 decided December 7, 1976 Michael J. Daly III, special public defender, for the appellant (defendant). Joseph A. Hill, assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).

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

It appearing that the defendant in the above-entitled case has failed to prosecute his appeal from the Superior Court for the judicial district of Waterbury with proper diligence, it is, under Prae[695] tice Book § 696, ordered by the Supreme Court, suo motu, that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed unless the defendant on or before December 28, 1976, files his brief.

Argued December 7 decided December 7, 1976 Michael J. Daly III, special public defender, for the appellant (defendant). Joseph A. Hill, assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).

State v. Lewis, 366 A.2d 804, 172 Conn. 694 (Colo. 1976).

Pincite

366 A.2d 804 (State v. Lewis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.