Legal Opinion
State v. Paulette
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided March 5, 1969PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThim, J.
The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether the court committed error by admitting a doctor’s report into evidence under the business record exception to the hearsay rule pursuant to § 52-180 of the G-eneral Statutes, the pertinent portion of which is set forth in the footnote.1
The defendant was charged with rape, and, at the trial, the state sought to introduce a doctor’s report which set forth the results of a vaginal examination which had been made of the complaining witness. Shortly after the alleged rape had occurred, the complaining witness was examined at the police station by a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- D'AMATO v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953
- State v. ReidSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
- Brown v. Connecticut Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
- Salvatore v. HaydenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
- Szela v. Johnson Motor Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1958
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- River Dock & Pile, Inc. v. O & G Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- State v. LombardoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Kelly v. SheehanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
- People v. GauthierMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
- State v. MiselisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.