Legal Opinion
State v. Indrisano
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided April 5, 1994No. 14631PublishedCited by 123 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBorden, J.
The dispositive issue of this appeal is whether certain portions of the disorderly conduct statute, namely, General Statutes § 53a-182 (a) (1) and (2),1 *797are unconstitutionally vague under the fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution. The defendant, Albert Indrisano, was convicted, after a court trial, of disorderly conduct in violation of General Statutes § 53a-182 (a) (1) and (2).2
The defendant appealed to the Appellate Court from the judgment of conviction. The Appellate Court rejected the defendant’s constitutional claims that the statute is vague on its face and as applied…
2Cases cited55 opinions
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. O'BrienSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Ward v. Rock Against RacismSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by123 opinions
- State v. RossSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- State v. WebbSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Zalaski v. City of HartfordCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2013
- State v. PeelerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- State v. CobbSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
118 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.