State v. Nelson

Connecticut Appellate Court

State v. Nelson

725 A.2d 350, 51 Conn. App. 699, 1999 Conn. App. LEXIS 41

Connecticut Appellate Court·Decided February 9, 1999·No. AC 16838·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals from his conviction, following a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree¹ and carrying a pistol without a permit.² The sole issue claimed on appeal is that the trial court improperly instructed the jury that “reasonable doubt” is not a doubt suggested by the “ingenuity of counsel.”

The defendant relies on State v. Taylor, 239 Conn. 481, 504, 687 A.2d 489 (1996), cert. denied, 521 U.S. 1121, 117 S. Ct. 2515, 138 L. Ed. 2d 1017 (1997), in [700]*700which our Supreme Court, acting under its supervisory powers, urged trial courts to avoid further use of the “ingenuity of counsel” instruction. After we heard oral argument in the present case, the Supreme Court decided State v. Edwards, 247 Conn. 318, 721 A.2d 519 (1998), in which it held that the admonition in Taylor was not applicable where the trial court had instructed the jury prior to the date of the Taylor decision. The trial in the present case took place in September, 1996, and Taylor was not decided until December, 1996. Edwards, therefore, is controlling.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals from his conviction, following a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree¹ and carrying a pistol without a permit.² The sole issue claimed on appeal is that the trial court improperly instructed the jury that “reasonable doubt” is not a doubt suggested by the “ingenuity of counsel.”

The defendant relies on State v. Taylor, 239 Conn. 481, 504, 687 A.2d 489 (1996), cert. denied, 521 U.S. 1121, 117 S. Ct. 2515, 138 L. Ed. 2d 1017 (1997), in [700]*700which our Supreme Court, acting under its supervisory powers, urged trial courts to avoid further use of the “ingenuity of counsel” instruction. After we heard oral argument in the present case, the Supreme Court decided State v. Edwards, 247 Conn. 318, 721 A.2d 519 (1998), in which it held that the admonition in Taylor was not applicable where the trial court had instructed the jury prior to the date of the Taylor decision. The trial in the present case took place in September, 1996, and Taylor was not decided until December, 1996. Edwards, therefore, is controlling.

The judgment is affirmed.

State v. Nelson, 725 A.2d 350, 51 Conn. App. 699, 1999 Conn. App. LEXIS 41 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

725 A.2d 350 (State v. Nelson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related