Legal Opinion
State v. Van Sant
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 21, 1986No. 12627PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtArthur H. Healey, J.
This appeal arises out of the trial court’s declaration of a mistrial, over the defendant’s objection, on the ground of manifest necessity after a state’s witness became ill while testifying. We find no error.
The defendant, John Van Sant, had been brought to trial on charges of larceny in the first degree in violation of General Statutes (Rev. to 1981) § 53a-122 (a) (2) and burglary in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-103 (a). On September 20, 1983, after a jury had been impaneled, the state called as a witness Bernard Halapin, a Monroe police detective. In the course…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Abney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- United States v. JornSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Arizona v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. PerezSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Shay v. RossiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- State v. CrawfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- State v. TateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- State v. BoydSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- State v. JamesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.