State v. Ortiz
This text of 40 A.3d 785 (State v. Ortiz) 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.
Opinion
STATE of Connecticut
v.
Akov ORTIZ.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Pamela S. Nagy, assigned counsel, in support of the petition.
Michele C. Lukban, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition.
The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 133 Conn.App. 118, 33 A.3d 862, is granted, limited to the following issues:
"1. Should this court overrule State v. Pommer, 110 Conn.App. 608, 955 A.2d 637, cert, denied, 289 Conn. 951, 961 A.2d 418 (2008), which holds that the act of preventing someone from giving a statement to the police falls within the witness tampering statute, General Statutes § 53a-151(a)?
"2. If so, did the Appellate Court erroneously conclude that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the defendant's conviction of tampering with a witness?"
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
40 A.3d 785, 304 Conn. 914, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-ortiz-conn-2012.