Legal Opinion

State v. Heinemann

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided May 8, 2007No. SC 17789PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KATZ, J.

The principal issue in this appeal is whether the trial court improperly failed to instruct the jury to consider the age of the defendant, Gabriel P. Heinemann, specifically, the level of maturity, sense of responsibility, vulnerability and personality traits of a sixteen year old, when deciding his defense of duress. According to the defendant, because it is more difficult for adolescents to resist pressures due to their limited decision-making capacity and their susceptibility to outside influences, the trial court improperly failed to provide an instruction that would have…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Washington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Roper v. SimmonsSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  4. State v. GoldingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
  5. United States v. BaileySupreme Court of the United States · 1980

31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. State v. SalamonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
  2. State v. CourchesneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
  3. State v. RizzoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
  4. McMillan v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  5. State v. GonzalezSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API