Opinion · Connecticut Appellate Court Opinions

STATE v. CRUZ, 253 Conn. 901 (2000)

STATE OF Conn. v. HERIBERTO CRUZ, 753 A.2d 938 (Conn. 2000)

Type
Opinion
Court
Connecticut Appellate Court Opinions
Jurisdiction
Connecticut
Date
2000-04-28
Topic
general

STATE v. CRUZ, 253 Conn. 901 (2000) 753 A.2d 938 STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. HERIBERTO CRUZSupreme Court of Connecticut The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 56 Conn. App. 763 (AC 18323), is granted, limited to the following issue: "Did the Appellate Court properly allow the testimony of a social worker identifying the defendant as the perpetrator under the medical treatment exception to the hearsay rule?" The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16299. Richard S.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed STATE v. CRUZ, 253 Conn. 901 (2000). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

STATE v. CRUZ,253 Conn. 901(2000)
753 A.2d 938
STATE OF CONNECTICUTv.HERIBERTO CRUZ
Supreme Court of Connecticut
The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court,56 Conn. App. 763(AC 18323), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court properly allow the testimony of a social worker identifying the defendant as the perpetrator under the medical treatment exception to the hearsay rule?"

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 16299.Richard S. Cramer, in support of the petition.Mitchell S. Brody, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.
Decided April 28, 2000