State v. Santiago
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Per curiam
The defendant was convicted of two counts of failure to assist a peace officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167b after a jury trial. He appealed from this judgment to the Appellate Court, claiming that: (1) the trial court had improperly permitted the state to amend the information by adding on the morning of trial the two counts on which he was found guilty; (2) § 53a-167b is unconstitutionally vague *485and overbroad; and (3) the jury should have been instructed to acquit the defendant if the officer’s request for assistance was unlawful. The Appellate Court affirmed the judgment;…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. GoldingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- State v. FloydSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- State v. SantiagoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
- State v. SantiagoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. MarsalaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- State v. TorresConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Hyatt v. City of MilfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- State v. IndrisanoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- State v. PittConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.