State v. Norman P.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtKahn, J.
**443*1146The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether the Appellate Court properly concluded that the trial court lacked discretion to refuse to mark records for identification following the court's determination that the defendant, Norman P., had failed to make the requisite showing to require an in camera review of those records. State v. Norman P ., 169 Conn. App. 616, 639-40, 151 A.3d 877 (2016). We conclude that the trial court had no such discretion. This certified1 **444appeal arises from the defendant's conviction of three counts of sexual assault in a spousal relationship in…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State v. HinesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- State v. EspositoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- State v. SaucierSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- State v. CastonguaySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- State v. BrunoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. JacksonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2020
- Zheng v. XiaConnecticut Appellate Court · 2021
- Shirley P. v. Norman P.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
- State v. Calderon-PerezConnecticut Appellate Court · 2025
- Charlie Willie Steven v. State of AlaskaCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2023
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.