Johnson v. State
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, J.
Pursuant to General Statutes § 52-270,1 the petitioner brought this petition for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. Following an adverse ruling, the petitioner appealed to this *60court claiming that the trial court was obligated to order a new trial because the victim recanted his identification testimony. Related to this claim is the petitioner’s argument concerning the applicable standard for granting a petition for a new trial. In the alternative, the petitioner argues that the trial court abused its discretion by deciding that the victim’s recantation would not likely…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- United States v. AgursSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- State v. PrudholmSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1984
- Larrison v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1928
- Berry v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1851
- United States v. George StofskyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Shabazz v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Morant v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- Gould v. Commissioner of CorrectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
- Williams v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Channer v. StateConnecticut Appellate Court · 1999
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.