Legal Opinion
State v. Luria
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided December 17, 1923PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.
Upon the trial the following preliminary motions were made by one or both of the accused: (1) for a change of venue; (2) for a separate trial of each of the accused; (3) for a dismissal of the jury upon a challenge to the array.
The first and second motions were addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and unless the record discloses that such discretion has been abused by denying the motions, the rulings of the court will be sustained. A motion for a change of venue in a criminal case is made under authority of General Statutes, § 6630. This statute, by its terms, clearly denotes that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. FerroneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- State v. CastelliSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1917
- State v. BrauneisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1911
- State v. BuxtonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
- State v. HoganSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1896
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- State v. PiskorskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- State v. FrostSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- State v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- State v. CobbsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.