State v. Simmons
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtPrescott, J.
In this criminal case, a witness for the state, George Harris, was promised that he would not be prosecuted for perjury even if he lied during his testimony. The trial court acquiesced to this agreement, despite recognizing that it "is probably against the public interest ...." This appeal requires us to decide, under the circumstances of this case, whether the defendant, Kevan Simmons, is entitled to a new trial because of this concededly unlawful promise. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that this error was so egregious in nature that it undermines public confidence in the due…
Also in this document: Concurring in the judgment.
2Cases cited78 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Alpha Beta Capital Partners, L.P. v. Pursuit Investment Management, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2020
- Lisboa v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2025