State v. Collins
Citations
- 206 Conn. App. 438
Syllabus
The defendant, who had been convicted of two counts of the crime of possession of narcotics with intent to sell, appealed to this court, claim- ing that the trial court improperly denied his motions for a mistrial and his motion to suppress evidence, including, inter alia, 121 bags of individually packaged crack cocaine, that was seized from his residence pursuant to a search warrant. At trial, the state offered the expert testimony of a police detective, P, who testified about the quantities of drugs usually found in the possession of people who sell drugs as opposed to people who only use drugs. Answering a hypothetical posed by the prosecutor, P testified that the possession of 121 bags of crack cocaine was consistent with someone who sold drugs. Following argu- ment that this testimony went to the ultimate issue of the defendant's intent, the court denied defense counsel's motion for a mistrial. The state also offered the testimony of Y, a police sergeant, who testified that he knew where the defendant lived ''from other situations'' that involved the defendant. Defense counsel argued that Y's testimony improperly informed the jury that the defendant had prior involvement with the police but did not request a limiting or curative instruction following the court's denial of a motion for a mistrial. The defendant also argued that the search warrant for his apartment, the application for which had been based on the affidavit of P and another police detective, L, referencing in part two sales of narcotics by the defendant to a confidential informant, had been issued without probable cause. Held: 1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motions for a mistrial. a. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a mistrial after P's testimony, as P's response to the state's hypothetical questions did not amount to an opinion as to the ultimate issue of the defendant's intent to sell narcotics; pursuan
Judges: Bright; Elgo; Clark
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
2 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.