Legal Opinion
State v. Dibattista
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 24, 1930PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, C. J.
The accused elected to be tried under Public Acts of 1927, Chapter 107, by the court composed of three judges. We held in State v. Frost, 105 Conn. 326, 329, 135 Atl. 446: “The court is by this statute substituted for the jury and fulfils in the trial of a criminal cause without a jury the duties of both court and jury.” Fulfilling the function of the jury it determines upon the evidence the guilt or innocence of the accused. In a case tried to the jury the only method open to the accused of having that question determined on appeal is by motion to set aside the verdict and assigning the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. FrostSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- State v. CastelliSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1917
- State v. WillisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
- State v. WakefieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1914
- State v. FeltovicSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Rogers v. RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- State v. VennardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1970
- State v. KylesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- State v. BriceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- State v. DavisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.