State v. Assuntino

This case involves interpretation of the requirement of the wiretapping and electronic surveillance statute; General Statutes § 54-41c (8); 1 that applications for interception orders must contain statements of all previous wiretap applications involving the same subject. Finding a failure to disclose a previously authorized wiretap, the trial court, Levister, J. and Belinkie, J., suppressed the state’s evidence derived from the present wiretap, and rendered a judgment dismissing charges of professional gambling against the defendants Joseph D. Assuntino, Ronald Baia, Nicholas Y. Carrano,…