Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Hammond

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided October 10, 2000No. AC 18702Published

1DissentLavery, J.

Although I agree with the majority that the trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to suppress, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the defendant did not receive multiple punishments for the same offense.

The defendant was charged with the following offenses which are relevant to this dissent. In count one, he was charged with possession of narcotics (cocaine) in violation of General Statutes § 21a-279 (a). In count two, he was charged with possession of narcotics (heroin) in violation of § 21a-279 (a). In count three, he was charged with possession of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. State v. ChicanoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  3. State v. GarvinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  4. State v. RawlsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  5. State v. HillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996

2 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