Skip to main content

State v. Garrison

Citations

  • 230 Conn. App. 820

Syllabus

Convicted of assault in the first degree, the defendant appealed. He claimed, inter alia, that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress certain statements he made to police officers while he was in a hospital receiving treatment for injuries he sustained in a physical altercation that led to his arrest and conviction. This court reversed the judgment of convic- tion and remanded the case for a new trial without addressing the other claims the defendant raised in his appeal. On the granting of certification, the state appealed to our Supreme Court, which determined that the defen- dant had not been in custody during any of his interactions with the police at the hospital and, therefore, his statements should not have been sup- pressed. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of this court and remanded the case to this court with direction to consider the defendant's remaining claims on appeal, including his claim that the admission of his statements to the police violated his right to due process. Held: The trial court did not improperly deny the defendant's motion to suppress his statements to the police officers, as the state sufficiently demonstrated that the statements, under the totality of the circumstances, were voluntary and, thus, their admission at trial did not violate his right to due process. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for sanctions against the state for its failure to comply with certain of the court's discovery orders and its failure to disclose alleged impeachment evidence pursuant to Brady v. Maryland (373 U.S. 83) and Giglio v. United States (405 U.S. 150). This court declined the defendant's request to exercise its supervisory authority over the administration of justice to direct trial courts to conduct a formal, on the record inquiry during pretrial hearings to ascertain whether the state has exercised due diligence in locating evidence favorable to defendants, as the defendant f

Judges: Moll; Suarez; Prescott

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cites

24 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.