From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Paul B.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 18, 2013
76 A.3d 626 (Conn. 2013)

Opinion

2013-09-18

STATE of Connecticut v. PAUL B.

Glenn W. Falk, assigned counsel, in support of the petition. Kathryn W. Bare, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.


Glenn W. Falk, assigned counsel, in support of the petition. Kathryn W. Bare, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.

The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 143 Conn.App. 691, 70 A.3d 1123, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the trial court properly admitted out-of-court statements of the victims as age inappropriate knowledge of the victims? If not, was the error harmful in light of the limiting instruction given?

“2. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the trial court properly allowed into evidence the testimony of Officer Kim Parrott which provided the context for the defendant's admission to the conduct underlying the sexual assault charges? If not, was the error harmful?

“3. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the state did not engage in prosecutorial impropriety during closing argument?”


Summaries of

State v. Paul B.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 18, 2013
76 A.3d 626 (Conn. 2013)
Case details for

State v. Paul B.

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Connecticut v. PAUL B.

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Sep 18, 2013

Citations

76 A.3d 626 (Conn. 2013)
310 Conn. 909

Citing Cases

State v. Paul B.

We have reversed the order of the first two certified issues to dispose at the outset of the claim that we…