From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Sumler

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
May 17, 2022
343 Conn. 916 (Conn. 2022)

Opinion

05-17-2022

STATE of Connecticut v. Jamal SUMLER

Naomi T. Fetterman, assigned counsel, in support of the petition. Laurie N. Feldman, deputy assistant state's attorney, in opposition.


Naomi T. Fetterman, assigned counsel, in support of the petition.

Laurie N. Feldman, deputy assistant state's attorney, in opposition.

On consideration of the defendant's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 199 Conn. App. 187, 235 A.3d 576 (2020), it is ordered as follows: "The petition is granted as to the defendant's claim that the testimony of the defendant's former probation officer identifying the defendant in a still photograph and video surveillance footage constituted impermissible opinion testimony on the ultimate issue and is denied as to all other claims presented for review. It is further ordered that the case is remanded to the Appellate Court with direction to consider the defendant's claim regarding the allegedly improper opinion testimony in light of this court's decisions in State v. Bruny , 342 Conn. 169, 269 A.3d 38 (2022), and State v. Gore , 342 Conn. 129, 269 A.3d 1 (2022)."


Summaries of

State v. Sumler

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
May 17, 2022
343 Conn. 916 (Conn. 2022)
Case details for

State v. Sumler

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Connecticut v. Jamal SUMLER

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: May 17, 2022

Citations

343 Conn. 916 (Conn. 2022)
274 A.3d 867