Skip to main content

State v. Hinds

Citations

  • 344 Conn. 541

Syllabus

Convicted of the crimes of murder and carrying a dangerous weapon in connection with the stabbing death of the victim, the defendant appealed to this court. The defendant had been staying with his friend L in L's apartment. On the evening of the murder, the victim, J, and another individual were consuming alcohol and drugs in J's apartment, which was on the floor above L's apartment. At some point that evening, the defendant, who was highly intoxicated, entered J's apartment and began arguing with the victim. J then expelled both men from her apartment. Soon thereafter, J learned that the victim had been in a fight, and she immediately went to the floor on which L's apartment was, where she found the victim, who had been stabbed multiple times. The police subsequently arrived at the scene, and, while they were attending to the victim, the defendant emerged from L's apartment and started kick- ing the victim and yelling. During a search of L's apartment, the police found a knife on the kitchen floor lying next to a pool of blood. It was later determined that the knife had both the victim's and the defendant's DNA on it. Following the incident, the police interviewed the defendant on two occasions. Over the course of those interviews, the defendant repeatedly changed his version of the events, stating first that he did not know the victim, but later stating that he fought with the victim, whom he knew, after confronting him about the victim's alleged sexual object timely to the introduction of evidence . . . is deemed to have waived such objection . . . and may not subsequently resurrect it'' (internal quota- tion marks omitted)); State v. Brown, 279 Conn. 493, 503, 903 A.2d 169 (2006) (''any infirmity in the evidence . . . is deemed to be waived if not seasonably raised'' (internal quotation marks omitted)). Moreover, as I do not believe that the state had clear notice either that it was required to explain its failure to do more or that its representations to the tr

Judges: Robinson; McDonald; D’Auria; Mullins; Kahn; Ecker; Alexander

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.