Legal Opinion

State v. Petitt

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided December 5, 2017No. AC38993PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFlynn, J.

Real evidence that plays an actual and direct part in the incidents giving rise to a criminal trial may be properly authenticated because it was found or seized at the crime scene. Where that real evidence is a narcotic substance, the state's proof of that narcotic character is properly authenticated by presenting testimony tracing the evidence from the time it was found or, in this case, purchased to the time it is offered in the courtroom with sufficient completeness to render it reasonably probable that what is offered is the original and has neither been changed nor altered.

The defendant,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. McClainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2017
  2. State v. BrunoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
  3. State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
  4. State v. Anonymous (83-FG)Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
  5. State v. HallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1973

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. RodriguezSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2020
  2. State v. FrazierConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018
  3. Petitt v. RuizDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2023
  4. State v. PetittSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
  5. State v. RodriguezSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API