State v. Laws

I concur with parts III and IV of the majority opinion. I write separately because *299I disagree with part I A, where the majority holds that there was sufficient evidence for the jury to convict the defendant of escape from custody in violation of General Statutes § SZa-Yll.* 1

The majority holds that “custody” as defined in General Statutes § 53a-168 (2), which is a prerequisite to escape from custody as defined by § 53a-171, is accomplished by a police officer’s pointing a gun at a suspect and telling the suspect that he is under arrest. The majority reaches its holding by explaining that…