Opinion · Supreme Court of Connecticut
State v. Hart
217 Conn. 811
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of Connecticut
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut
- Date
- 1991-02-21
- Topic
- general
The state of Connecticut’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 23 Conn. App. 746, is granted, limited to the following issues: “1. Did the Appellate Court correctly rule that the state may not satisfy its burden of proving the defendant is not drug-dependent by destroying the credibility of defense witnesses, even though drug dependency is not an element of General Statutes § 21a-278 (b)? “2. Was the Appellate Court correct in not considering facts elicited by the state during cross-examination when it determined there was insufficient evidence of non-drug-dependency? “3. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the trial court’s instructions were erroneous because *812it instructed the jury to determine whether the defendant’s evidence of drug dependency was credible?” RitaM.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed State v. Hart. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 1 opinion
The state of Connecticut’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 23 Conn. App. 746, is granted, limited to the following issues:
“1. Did the Appellate Court correctly rule that the state may not satisfy its burden of proving the defendant is not drug-dependent by destroying the credibility of defense witnesses, even though drug dependency is not an element of General Statutes § 21a-278 (b)?
“2. Was the Appellate Court correct in not considering facts elicited by the state during cross-examination when it determined there was insufficient evidence of non-drug-dependency?
“3. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the trial court’s instructions were erroneous because