State v. Wiener
Opinion
Opinion
The defendant, Jeffrey Wiener, appeals, following our grant of certification, from the judgment of the Appellate Court, which affirmed the trial court’s judgment of conviction of the crime of larceny in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-123 (a) (2).1 State v. Wiener, 58 Conn. App. 203, 753 A.2d 376 (2000). We granted the defendant’s petition for certification to appeal limited to the following issues: (1) “Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court’s granting of the complainant’s motion to quash did not violate the defendant’s sixth amendment rights to compulsory process and to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him?”; and (2) “If the answer to question one is ‘yes,’ did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it granted the complainant’s motion to quash, ruling that the subpoenaed financial records were ‘collateral?’”2 State v. Wiener, 254 Conn. 924, 761 A.2d 757 (2000).
After examining the entire record on appeal and considering the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, [225] we have determined that the appeal in this case should be dismissed on the ground that certification was improvidently granted.
The appeal is dismissed.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
772 A.2d 592 (State v. Wiener) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.