Legal Opinion
State v. Faillace
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 14, 1947PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.
The defendant, after a trial to the jury, was convicted of conspiracy to violate the statutes against gaming. He claims that the court lacked jurisdiction because he was not tried within 1he time limited by statute and that the court erred in denying his motion to set aside the verdict.
The first claim is based on General Statutes, § 6428. “Any case which shall come to the superior court by . . . binding over ... for a violation of any statute against . . . gaming . . . shall be tried at the first term of the court to which such case shall so come by . . . binding over at which a jury shall be…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- State v. HayesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1941
- State v. Chin LungSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- State v. MurphySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- State v. KempSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- State v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1945
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- State v. TaylorSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- State v. CrumpSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- State v. HolmesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1970
- State v. AcklinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.