State v. Best
Citations
- 337 Conn. 312
Syllabus
Convicted of murder, attempt to commit murder, and assault in the first degree in connection with the shooting of his girlfriend's daughter, O, and O's roommate, J, the defendant appealed to this court, claiming that the trial court had abused its discretion in admitting into evidence four photographs depicting the bloody interior of the car in which O and J drove to the hospital after the shooting. On the day of the shooting, O and J arrived at the house where the defendant and his girlfriend lived and found them arguing inside a locked bedroom. O and J demanded that the defendant open the bedroom door. When he did, he shot O and J each once in the chest. O and J fled to O's car and drove to the hospital, where J died as a result of her injuries. At trial, the state introduced into evidence, over defense counsel's objection, the four photographs as full exhibits. On appeal to this court, the defendant claimed that the trial court had improperly admitted the photographs because they were not relevant to the crimes with which he was charged and, alternatively, because they were unduly prejudicial insofar as their graphic nature had a tendency to arouse the jurors' passions. Held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting into evidence the photographs depicting the bloody interior of the car that O and J used to flee the shooting: the photographs were relevant because the amount of blood loss that O and J suffered immediately after the shooting and the corres- ponding severity of their wounds were probative of certain elements of the charged offenses, namely, whether the wounds the defendant inflicted were grievous enough to cause J's death and serious physical injury to O, and the defendant's intent as to those offenses; moreover, the photographs were relevant because they corroborated O's testimony at trial about the events that transpired immediately following the shoot- ing; furthermore, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concludin
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- ‘‘[t]he test for determining whether evidence is unduly prejudicial is not whether it is damaging to the [party against whom the evidence is offered] but whether it will improperly arouse the emotions of the jur[ors]’’ (internal quotation marks omitted)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Robinson; Palmer; McDonald; D’Auria; Mullins; Kahn; Ecker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. ArmadoreSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2021-03-23· cited 15×
- State v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2025-07-01· cited 6×
- State v. ParrisSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2025-07-29· cited 4×
- State v. TorresSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2022-05-10· cited 3×
- Kovachich v. Dept. of Mental Health & Addiction ServicesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2022-09-27· cited 2×
- State v. James A.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2022-12-19· cited 1×
- State v. StreitSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2021-10-22
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2024-08-13
- State v. MebaneSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2024-08-20
- Idlibi v. Hartford Courant Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2024-08-27
- State v. SousaConnecticut Appellate Court· 2026-06-16
Cites
26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2003-06-03· cited 248×
- State v. RossSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1994-07-26· cited 228×
- Commonwealth v. Woodard, A., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2015-12-03· cited 216×
- Campfield v. Stickman, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at GreeneSupreme Court· 2004-03-08· cited 186×
- State v. KellySupreme Court of Connecticut· 2001-05-08· cited 162×
- State v. KulmacSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1994-07-05· cited 159×
- State v. SaucierSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-07-17· cited 151×
- State v. GeyerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1984-07-24· cited 103×
- State v. MurraySupreme Court of Connecticut· 2000-09-05· cited 78×
- State v. DeJesusSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1984-09-04· cited 75×
- State v. DoehrerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-07-29· cited 73×
- State v. BonnerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-02-24· cited 59×
- State v. SatchwellSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1998-04-28· cited 57×
- State v. MoodySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1990-04-24· cited 54×
- State v. JacobsonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-08-21· cited 49×
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-08-10· cited 41×
- State v. GarySupreme Court of Connecticut· 2005-04-19· cited 34×
- State v. PaulinoSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1992-08-12· cited 34×
- State v. RiveraSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2017-01-04· cited 29×
- State v. LaBreckSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1970-05-06· cited 25×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.