Legal Opinion
State v. Waterman
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided June 24, 2003No. SC 16936PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KATZ, J.
The principal issue on appeal is whether the trial court properly exercised jurisdiction when, weeks after judgment had been rendered, and after the execution of the judgment had begun, the court made a factual finding and advised the defendant of the mandatory sex offender registration requirements pursuant to General Statutes § 54-251,1 a provision in the statu*486tory scheme commonly referred to as “Megan’s Law.” See General Statutes § 54-250 et seq. On April 6, 2001, following a jury trial, the defendant was convicted of one count of public indecency in violation of General…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Goss v. LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Smith v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Connecticut Department of Public Safety v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- State v. KellySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- State v. NardiniSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- State v. T.R.D.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- State v. TRDSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- State v. BletschSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- State v. FowlkesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- State v. ARTHUR H.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.