Legal Opinion
State v. Reinosa
Connecticut Superior Court
Decided October 21, 1970No. File 3203PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtParskey, J.
This case presents the classic example of a judicial mishmash. To begin with, the state has filed a demurrer to a motion. A motion is complete in itself. It requires no responsive pleading. The state’s demurrer is mere surplusage which the court will expunge on its own motion.
To complicate matters still further, the defendant has filed a motion to quash and dismiss. If by means of this siamesed motion the defendant seeks to create a new centauric pleading and if lie intends by this creation to introduce into state practice the federal motion to dismiss, then the court cannot accept the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hernandez v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Whitus v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Beck v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- State v. SulSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
- State v. FassetSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1844
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. CoutureSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- King v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
- State v. CorchadoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- State v. BellamyConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
- State v. DillsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.