Sign Up for Vincent AI
State v. Jarmon
Alice Osedach, assistant public defender, in support of the petition.
Timothy J. Sugrue, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.
The defendant’s petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 195 Conn. App. 262, 224 A.3d 163 (2020) is denied.
3 cases
State v. Tinsley
"... ... Because double jeopardy attaches only if both steps are satisfied ... a determination that the offenses did not stem from the same act or transaction renders analysis under the second step unnecessary." (Footnote omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Jarmon , 195 Conn. App. 262, 282–83, 224 A.3d 163, cert. denied, 334 Conn. 925, 223 A.3d 379 (2020) ; see also State v. Porter , supra, 328 Conn. at 662, 182 A.3d 625. For purposes of double jeopardy analysis, a greater included offense and a lesser included offense constitute the same offense ... "
State v. Coleman
"... ... Myers , 178 Conn. App. 102, 106, 174 A.3d 197 (2017). Accordingly, we decline to address this argument. See State v. Jarmon , 195 Conn. App. 262, 277, 224 A.3d 163, cert. denied, 334 Conn. 925, 223 A.3d 379 (2020). 12 The defendant briefly suggests that "[c]ourts similarly lack jurisdiction in the context of a habeas [action] once a sentence has been fully served." The state responds that, "[n]ot only does the ... "
State v. Bradley
"...334 Conn. 925223 A.3d 379 (Mem)STATE of Connecticutv.William Hyde BRADLEYSupreme Court of Connecticut.Decided February 18, 2020Naomi T. Fetterman, assigned counsel, in support of the petition.James M. Ralls, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.The defendant's petition for certificatio..."
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
3 cases
State v. Tinsley
"... ... Because double jeopardy attaches only if both steps are satisfied ... a determination that the offenses did not stem from the same act or transaction renders analysis under the second step unnecessary." (Footnote omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Jarmon , 195 Conn. App. 262, 282–83, 224 A.3d 163, cert. denied, 334 Conn. 925, 223 A.3d 379 (2020) ; see also State v. Porter , supra, 328 Conn. at 662, 182 A.3d 625. For purposes of double jeopardy analysis, a greater included offense and a lesser included offense constitute the same offense ... "
State v. Coleman
"... ... Myers , 178 Conn. App. 102, 106, 174 A.3d 197 (2017). Accordingly, we decline to address this argument. See State v. Jarmon , 195 Conn. App. 262, 277, 224 A.3d 163, cert. denied, 334 Conn. 925, 223 A.3d 379 (2020). 12 The defendant briefly suggests that "[c]ourts similarly lack jurisdiction in the context of a habeas [action] once a sentence has been fully served." The state responds that, "[n]ot only does the ... "
State v. Bradley
"...334 Conn. 925223 A.3d 379 (Mem)STATE of Connecticutv.William Hyde BRADLEYSupreme Court of Connecticut.Decided February 18, 2020Naomi T. Fetterman, assigned counsel, in support of the petition.James M. Ralls, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.The defendant's petition for certificatio..."
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