Summerville v. Warden

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Summerville v. Warden

224 Conn. 918

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedNovember 25, 1992

DocketSC 14649

StatusPublished

This text of 224 Conn. 918 (Summerville v. Warden) 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

Summerville v. Warden, 224 Conn. 918 (Colo. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

The petitioner Robert Summerville’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 162 (AC 10114), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that it should not decide the issue of whether an ineffective investigation by a defense expert witness in a fashion that impairs the petitioner’s defense is impugned to the defense attorney?”

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

The petitioner Robert Summerville’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 162 (AC 10114), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that it should not decide the issue of whether an ineffective investigation by a defense expert witness in a fashion that impairs the petitioner’s defense is impugned to the defense attorney?”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 Conn. 918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/summerville-v-warden-conn-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack