State v. Papandrea

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Papandrea

994 A.2d 1289, 297 Conn. 902, 2010 Conn. LEXIS 188

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided May 20, 2010·No. SC 18616·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 120 Conn. App. 224 (AC 29768), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the state of Connecticut had presented sufficient evidence of the defendant’s intent to commit larceny?”

VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.

Moira L. Buckley, in support of the petition. Timothy J. Sugrue, senior assistant state’s attorney, in opposition. Decided May 20, 2010

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

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 120 Conn. App. 224 (AC 29768), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the state of Connecticut had presented sufficient evidence of the defendant’s intent to commit larceny?”

VERTEFEUILLE, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.

Moira L. Buckley, in support of the petition. Timothy J. Sugrue, senior assistant state’s attorney, in opposition. Decided May 20, 2010

State v. Papandrea, 994 A.2d 1289, 297 Conn. 902, 2010 Conn. LEXIS 188 (Colo. 2010).

Pincite

994 A.2d 1289 (State v. Papandrea) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related