Crawford v. Commissioner of Correction

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that ‘‘challenges to kidnapping instructions in criminal proceedings rendered final before [State v. Salamon, 287 Conn. 509, 949 A.2d 1092 (2008)] are not subject to the procedural default rule’’
• observing that since Jackson v. Commissioner of Correction, 227 Conn. 124, 132, 629 A.2d 413 [1993], our Supreme Court “consistently and broadly has applied the cause and prejudice standard to trial level and appellate level procedural defaults in habeas corpus petitions”
• observing that since Jackson v. Com- missioner of Correction, 227 Conn. 124, 132, 629 A.2d 413 [1993], our Supreme Court ‘consistently and broadly has applied the cause and prejudice standard to trial level and appellate level procedural defaults in habeas corpus petitions’
• declining to review constitutional claims that could not ‘‘fairly be construed as subsumed within or inextricably intertwined with the statutory claim [the petitioner] raised before the trial court’’
• \a clear and obvious mistake on the part of the trial court is a prerequisite for reversal under the plain error doctrine\ [internal quotation marks omitted]
• “a clear and obvious mistake on the part of the trial court is a prerequisite for reversal under the plain error doctrine” [internal quotation marks omitted]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).