In re Mark R.

How courts have described this case

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

• for purposes of determining whether sexual contact occurred it is irrelevant whether defendant made contact through clothing or with bare skin
• “[t]o have ‘sexual contact’ as defined by the statute it is irrelevant whether the [defendant’s] contact with the victim was through clothing or with bare skin”
• evidence that defendant attempted to pull down victim’s pants and ‘‘smacked the victim’s buttocks more than once . . . in a school hallway in front of several people . . . support[ed] a reasonable infer- ence’’ that defendant intended to degrade or humili- ate victim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Roy D. L.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2021-07-28· cited 23×
• State v. ALBERTO M.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2010-03-23· cited 8×
• State v. Jagat
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2008-11-11· cited 4×
• State v. Annulli
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2011-08-09· cited 3×
• People In Interest of J.O.
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2022-06-16

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Sivri
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1994-08-23· cited 184×
• State v. Perry
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1998-03-17· cited 20×
• State v. Eric T.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1986-08-26· cited 14×
• State v. Wilson
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1999-04-20· cited 7×