State v. Murray

49 Conn. App. 847
CourtConnecticut Appellate Court
DecidedJune 30, 1998
DocketAC 16916
StatusPublished

This text of 49 Conn. App. 847 (State v. Murray) 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. Murray, 49 Conn. App. 847 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We agree with the trial court that there was no evidence of availability of the missing witness whom the defendant claimed that the state should have produced. See State v. Jones, 46 Conn. App. 640, 656, 700 A.2d 710, cert. denied, 243 Conn. 941, 704 A.2d 797 (1997). The trial court’s determination of fact in so finding was not clearly erroneous. On the basis of the record, we cannot say that the trial court’s decision not to give an adverse inference instruction was clearly erroneous. State v. Battle, 39 Conn. App. 742, 746, 667 A.2d 1288 (1995), cert. denied, 237 Conn. 922, 676 A.2d 1375, cert. denied, 519 U.S. 955, 117 S. Ct. 373, 136 L. Ed. 2d 263 (1996).

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

State v. Battle
667 A.2d 1288 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1995)
State v. Jones
700 A.2d 710 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 Conn. App. 847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-murray-connappct-1998.