Legal Opinion

State v. Apt

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided November 12, 2013No. AC 33812PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PETERS, J.

“[T]he purpose of the erasure statute [General Statutes § 54-142a]1 ... is to protect innocent persons from the harmful consequences of a criminal charge which is subsequently dismissed.” (Emphasis omitted; footnote added; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Morowitz, 200 Conn. 440, 451, 512 A.2d 175 (1986). The principal issue in this case is whether a court can enhance a defendant’s sentence for committing a crime while released on bond pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-40b2 when, prior to the sentencing, the records relating to the arrests that led to the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. FERNANDO A.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
  2. State v. MorowitzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
  3. Landry v. SpitzConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
  4. Rado v. Board of Education of the Borough of NaugatuckSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  5. State v. AnonymousSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Martin v. Hearst CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2015
  2. State v. AptSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2015
  3. State v. AptSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API