State v. Williams

Supreme Court of Connecticut

State v. Williams

665 A.2d 909, 235 Conn. 920, 1995 Conn. LEXIS 386

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided October 16, 1995·No. SC 15325·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The state of Connecticut’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 39 Conn. App. 18 (AC 12769), is granted, limited to the following issues:

[921] The Supreme Court docket number is SC 15325. Susann E. Gill assistant state’s attorney, in support of the petition. Deborah DelPrete Sullivan, assistant public defender, in opposition. Decided October 16, 1995

“1. Under the circumstances of this case, did the Appellate Court properly conclude that, for purposes of General Statutes §§ 53a-54a and 53a-59 (a) (1) intent to cause death and intent to cause serious physical injury are mutually exclusive states of mind?

“2. If the answer to the first question is yes, was the error of the trial court harmless?”

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

The state of Connecticut’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 39 Conn. App. 18 (AC 12769), is granted, limited to the following issues:

[921] The Supreme Court docket number is SC 15325. Susann E. Gill assistant state’s attorney, in support of the petition. Deborah DelPrete Sullivan, assistant public defender, in opposition. Decided October 16, 1995

“1. Under the circumstances of this case, did the Appellate Court properly conclude that, for purposes of General Statutes §§ 53a-54a and 53a-59 (a) (1) intent to cause death and intent to cause serious physical injury are mutually exclusive states of mind?

“2. If the answer to the first question is yes, was the error of the trial court harmless?”

State v. Williams, 665 A.2d 909, 235 Conn. 920, 1995 Conn. LEXIS 386 (Colo. 1995).

Pincite

665 A.2d 909 (State v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related