Supreme Court of Connecticut· 8/18/1998

State v. Francis

Citations

246 Conn. 339
717 A.2d 696
1998 Conn. LEXIS 317

How courts have described this case

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

although generally it is improper for trial court to provide entire statutory definition of intent when charge required specific intent, no error in context of particular case when jury not misled
although generally it is improper for trial court to provide entire statutory definition of intent when charge required specific intent, no error in context of particular case when jury not misled
not reasonably possible jury misled by improper instruction on intent when court repeatedly gave proper instruction
‘‘‘[m]andatory presumptions . . . violate the [d]ue [p]rocess [c]lause if they relieve the [s]tate of the burden of persuasion on an element of an offense’ ’’
although generally it is improper for trial court to provide entire statutory definition of intent when charge required specific intent, no error in context of particular case when jury not misled
although court provided entire statutory definition of intent in instruction, it repeatedly instructed jury that to find defendant guilty of murder, jury had to conclude defendant intended to cause death of victim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Norcott

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

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.