Mercer v. Commissioner of Correction
Connecticut Appellate Court
1DissentFreedman, J.
Where material issues of fact are in dispute, it is fundamental to our notions of due process of law that a party is entitled to the opportunity to have the trier of fact resolve those disputed factual issues after a full evidentiary proceeding. Because I believe that the allegations of the habeas petition in this case are not insufficient as a matter of law to permit the granting of the petition, I conclude that the trial court improperly denied the petitioner the opportunity to present evidence in support of his petition for habeas corpus. Accordingly, I dissent.
The petitioner alleges that…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- State v. GoldingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- State v. EvansSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
- Lozada v. Warden, State PrisonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- State v. MercerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.