State v. Leonard
State of Connecticut v. James Leonard
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 31 Conn. App. 178 (AC 10653), is granted, limited to the following issue:
“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court’s instruction on reasonable doubt (‘A reasonable doubt is a doubt for which a valid reason can be assigned’) did not dilute the state’s burden of proof or violate the presumption of innocence?”
Concurring in Part, Dissenting in Part
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Berdon, J.,
concurring in part and dissenting in part. I concur that we should review the issue certified. I dissent because I would also certify for review the following issues: (1) Whether the Appellate Court was correct in holding that the trial court properly concluded, from *913 the totality of circumstances, that the defendant was not unlawfully seized, and that police officers had a reasonable and articulable suspicion for an investigative detention; and (2) whether the Appellate Court was correct in holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in precluding the defendant from asking the police officer who obtained the information used as the basis for the stop, questions concerning the reliability of the confidential informant and the basis of the informant’s information?
The Supreme Court docket number is SC 14797. Susan M. Hankins, assistant public defender, in support of the petition. Mary H. Lesser, assistant state’s attorney, in opposition. Decided June 17, 1993
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 0 cases
No case in this database cites this case.