From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marshall v. Comm'r Vehicles

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Mar 23, 2022
342 Conn. 912 (Conn. 2022)

Opinion

03-23-2022

Anthony J. MARSHALL III v. COMMISSIONER OF MOTOR VEHICLES

Cody A. Layton, in support of the petition. Drew S. Graham, assistant attorney general, in opposition.


Cody A. Layton, in support of the petition.

Drew S. Graham, assistant attorney general, in opposition.

The plaintiff's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 210 Conn. App. 109, 269 A.3d 816, is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that a Department of Motor Vehicles hearing officer conducting a motor vehicle operator's license suspension hearing had the discretion to admit into evidence an A-44 form and its attachments, including a narrative police report, notwithstanding the fact that the form and attachments were neither prepared nor mailed to the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles in compliance with the timelines set forth in General Statutes § 14-227b (c) and the fact that the officer preparing the form and the attachments was not present for crossexamination?" D'AURIA, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.


Summaries of

Marshall v. Comm'r Vehicles

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Mar 23, 2022
342 Conn. 912 (Conn. 2022)
Case details for

Marshall v. Comm'r Vehicles

Case Details

Full title:Anthony J. MARSHALL III v. COMMISSIONER OF MOTOR VEHICLES

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Mar 23, 2022

Citations

342 Conn. 912 (Conn. 2022)
272 A.3d 198