Legal Opinion
State v. Marquis
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided February 14, 1995No. 13373PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Per curiam
Our review of the record, briefs, and oral arguments of the parties leads us to conclude that the record is not adequate to afford review of the issues raised by the state.
The state’s appeal1 is taken from the trial court’s dismissal of the case on the application of both the state and the defendant, after the trial court denied the state’s motion for permission to videotape the testimony of the child victim out of the presence of the defendant. See General Statutes § 54-86g.
*804While the record discloses that the trial court found that the state had made a “prima facie” showing of entitlement to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Walton v. Town of New HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Matza v. MatzaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Holmes v. HolmesConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Water Street Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Innopak Plastics Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
3Cited by8 opinions
- Thompson v. OrcuttConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- State v. AriscoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1995
- State v. MarquisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- State v. MarquisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- DeLuca v. DeLucaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.