State v. Yurch
Opinion
The only certified issue in this criminal appeal is whether a defendant who, at trial, argued that forgery in the third degree is a lesser included offense of forgery in the second degree is entitled thereafter to appellate review of his belated claim that the former crime is not a lesser included offense of the latter crime. After a trial to the court, the defendant, John Yurch, was acquitted of forgery in the second degree in violation of [470] General Statutes § 53a-139 (a) (1),1 but was convicted of two counts of forgery in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-140.2 The trial court subsequently found that the defendant was in violation of probation pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-32.3 On appeal, the Appellate Court affirmed the judgment of conviction as to the two counts of forgery in the third degree. State v. Yurch, 37 Conn. App. 72, 654 A.2d 1246 (1995). This court granted, in part, the defendant’s petition for certification to appeal.4
[471] After examining the record on appeal and after considering the briefs and the arguments of the parties, we have concluded that the appeal should be dismissed on the ground that certification was improvidently granted. In the circumstances of this case, the issue on which we granted certification was sufficiently addressed in the opinion of the Appellate Court, and it would serve no useful purpose for us to amplify the discussion therein contained. See State v. Busque, 229 Conn. 839, 842, 643 A.2d 1281 (1994); State v. Murray, 225 Conn. 524, 527, 624 A.2d 377 (1993).
The appeal is dismissed.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
667 A.2d 797 (State v. Yurch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.