Sign Up for Vincent AI
State v. Alonzo
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Neal Cone, senior assistant public defender, in support of the petition.
Raheem L. Mullins, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.
The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 131 Conn.App. 1, 26 A.3d 109, is denied.
EVELEIGH, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.
1 cases
State v. Anderson
"... ... In support of the claim that the court should have found the interrogatory dispositive, the defendant also cites Ex Parte Peterson , 253 U.S. 300, 310, 40 S. Ct. 543, 64 L. Ed. 919 (1920), Seals v. Hickey , 186 Conn. 337, 351, 441 A.2d 604 (1982), State v. Alonzo , 131 Conn. App. 1, 6, 26 A.3d 109, cert. denied, 303 Conn. 912, 32 A.3d 965 (2011), and Practice Book § 42-30 ("[t]he judicial authority shall, if the verdict is in order and technically correct, accept it without comment") to bolster the proposition that questions of fact are in the sole domain ... "
Try vLex and Vincent AI for free
Start a free trialExperience vLex's unparalleled legal AI
Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
1 cases
State v. Anderson
"... ... In support of the claim that the court should have found the interrogatory dispositive, the defendant also cites Ex Parte Peterson , 253 U.S. 300, 310, 40 S. Ct. 543, 64 L. Ed. 919 (1920), Seals v. Hickey , 186 Conn. 337, 351, 441 A.2d 604 (1982), State v. Alonzo , 131 Conn. App. 1, 6, 26 A.3d 109, cert. denied, 303 Conn. 912, 32 A.3d 965 (2011), and Practice Book § 42-30 ("[t]he judicial authority shall, if the verdict is in order and technically correct, accept it without comment") to bolster the proposition that questions of fact are in the sole domain ... "
Try vLex and Vincent AI for free
Start a free trialStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting