State v. Boyle
Connecticut Appellate Court
1DissentLavine, J.
“Since probation is, first and foremost, a penal alternative to incarceration—its objectives are to foster the offender’s reformation and to preserve the public’s safety—a sentencing court must have the discretion to fashion those conditions of probation it deems necessary to ensure that the individual successfully completes the terms of probation.” State v. Smith, 207 Conn. 152, 168-69, 540 A.2d 679 (1988). The majority would reverse the judgment of the trial court “[b]ecause there is no nexus between the modified condition [of probation] and the [conviction] for which the defendant [Kevin…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- State v. GrahamConnecticut Appellate Court · 1994
- State v. TiradoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- United States v. Freddie B. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- State v. PiegerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.