Legal Opinion
State v. Rosario
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 30, 1996No. 15331PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtNorcott, J.
The dispositive question in this certified appeal by the state is whether the Appellate Court improperly concluded that the issuing magistrate could not have inferred that the references in the search warrant affidavit to “January 6, 1992,” were scrivener’s errors. We answer this question in the affirmative and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the Appellate Court.1
*382The facts of this case are set forth in the majority opinion of the Appellate Court. State v. Rosario, 39 Conn. App. 550, 665 A.2d 152 (1995). “On January 6, 1993, an application for a search warrant, including a supporting…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- State v. BartonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Green v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
- State v. ShifflettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- State v. DeFuscoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. CobbSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- State v. FergusonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- State v. RespassSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- Greenstreet v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
- Commonwealth v. Leed, E., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.