State v. Panella

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Panella

329 A.2d 135, 167 Conn. 675

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided December 3, 1974·Published

Opinion

It appearing that the state has failed to defend with proper diligence against the defendant’s appeal, it is, under Practice Book § 696, ordered by the Supreme Court, suo motu, that, unless the state files its brief on or before February 3, 1975, the judgment of the Superior Court in New Haven County finding the defendant guilty as charged is set aside and the case is remanded thereto with direction to render judgment that the defendant is not guilty and to order that he be discharged.

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

It appearing that the state has failed to defend with proper diligence against the defendant’s appeal, it is, under Practice Book § 696, ordered by the Supreme Court, suo motu, that, unless the state files its brief on or before February 3, 1975, the judgment of the Superior Court in New Haven County finding the defendant guilty as charged is set aside and the case is remanded thereto with direction to render judgment that the defendant is not guilty and to order that he be discharged.

State v. Panella, 329 A.2d 135, 167 Conn. 675 (Colo. 1974).

Pincite

329 A.2d 135 (State v. Panella) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.