State v. Reardon

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Reardon

358 A.2d 699, 171 Conn. 733

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided June 1, 1976·Published

Opinion

It appearing that the defendant in the above-entitled case has failed to prosecute his appeal from the Superior Court in Fairfield County with proper diligence, it is, under Practice Book § 696, ordered [734] by the Supreme Court, suo motu, that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed unless the defendant files his brief on or before June 30, 1976.

Donald A. Browne, state’s attorney, for the appel-lee (state). David 8. Golub, for the appellant (defendant). Argued June 1 decided June 1, 1976

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

It appearing that the defendant in the above-entitled case has failed to prosecute his appeal from the Superior Court in Fairfield County with proper diligence, it is, under Practice Book § 696, ordered [734] by the Supreme Court, suo motu, that the appeal be and hereby is dismissed unless the defendant files his brief on or before June 30, 1976.

Donald A. Browne, state’s attorney, for the appel-lee (state). David 8. Golub, for the appellant (defendant). Argued June 1 decided June 1, 1976

State v. Reardon, 358 A.2d 699, 171 Conn. 733 (Colo. 1976).

Pincite

358 A.2d 699 (State v. Reardon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.