Legal Opinion
State v. Weinrib
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided August 4, 1953PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, C. J.
The jury found the defendant guilty on an information charging him with transporting Frank J. Kaminski for the purpose of prostitution, in violation of § 8548 of the General Statutes. The defendant’s motions for a directed verdict and to set aside the verdict of guilty were denied and sentence was imposed by the court. The defendant has appealed. Since his brief includes no appendix pursuant to §§ 445 (d) and 447 of the Practice Book, the errors assigned in the denial of the motions require no consideration. See Maltbie, Conn. App. Proc., §§ 116, 117; Kirkbride v. Bartz, 82 Conn. 615, 619, 74…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. GaetanoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- State v. LloydSupreme Court of Missouri · 1935
- Hoyt v. StuartSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
- Kirkbride v. BartzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1910
- Firszt v. KalinowskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Government of the Virgin Islands v. Vidal Galdon Aquino, Government of the Virgin Islands v. Ishmael Guillerma ReyesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
- State v. ManningSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
- Crochiere v. Board of Education of Town of EnfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- State v. AillonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- State v. OuimetteSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1972
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.