Legal Opinion

State v. Smith

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided March 27, 2018No. AC40398PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBishop, J.

The defendant, Jeffrey Smith, appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence. On appeal, the defendant argues that the court abused its discretion in denying his motion. Specifically, the defendant claims that his sentence violates his fifth amendment protection against double jeopardy, which is applied to the states through the fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution. The defendant also argues that the principles our Supreme Court established in State v. Polanco , 308 Conn. 242 , 61 A.3d 1084 (2013), and State v. Miranda , 317…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. Rutledge v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  4. Beard v. BanksSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. Beard v. BanksSupreme Court of the United States · 2004

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. SmithConnecticut Appellate Court · 2022
  2. State v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2021
  3. State v. PierreConnecticut Appellate Court · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API