Legal Opinion
State v. Frilando
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided December 2, 1980PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCotter, C. J.
On this appeal the defendant challenges his conviction on two counts of larceny in the third degree as set forth in the substitute information. He was also convicted of two counts of burglary. He attacks the validity of the conviction in the Perine larceny, the first count in the information, claiming that the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt “that the value of the goods taken exceeded $50.00.” He also claims that the court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the method of determining the value of the property he took from the homes of the victims Perine *399and McDonough. See…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. RoseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- State v. BakerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- National Folding Box Co. v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
- Sanford v. PeckSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
- Devinne Hallenbeck Co., Inc. v. Autoyre Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- First Bethel Associates v. Town of BethelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- State v. SpikesConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
- State v. RochetteConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.