State v. Valinski

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Valinski

733 A.2d 847, 249 Conn. 924, 1999 Conn. LEXIS 244

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedJune 23, 1999

DocketSC 16132

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 733 A.2d 847 (State v. Valinski) 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.

Bluebook

State v. Valinski, 733 A.2d 847, 249 Conn. 924, 1999 Conn. LEXIS 244 (Colo. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

The petition of the state of Connecticut for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 53 Conn. App. 23 (AC 17466), is granted, limited to the following issue:

[925]*925The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16132. Robert J. Scheinblum, assistant state’s attorney, in support of the petition. Robert J. McKay, in opposition. Decided June 23, 1999

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that, with respect to the judgment of conviction for operating a motor vehicle while the defendant’s license was under suspension, the trial court’s instruction, placing the burden of persuasion on the defendant regarding whether he was operating under a work permit, impermissibly diluted the state’s burden of proof?”

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

The petition of the state of Connecticut for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 53 Conn. App. 23 (AC 17466), is granted, limited to the following issue:

[925]*925The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16132. Robert J. Scheinblum, assistant state’s attorney, in support of the petition. Robert J. McKay, in opposition. Decided June 23, 1999

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that, with respect to the judgment of conviction for operating a motor vehicle while the defendant’s license was under suspension, the trial court’s instruction, placing the burden of persuasion on the defendant regarding whether he was operating under a work permit, impermissibly diluted the state’s burden of proof?”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

733 A.2d 847, 249 Conn. 924, 1999 Conn. LEXIS 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-valinski-conn-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack