Connecticut Appellate Court· 3/2/1999
State v. Hoa Van Nguyen
Citations
- 52 Conn. App. 85
- 726 A.2d 119
- 1999 Conn. App. LEXIS 72
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- standard of review of denial of motion for physical examination of sexual assault victim is one of abuse of discretion
- “ ‘a trial judge retains discretion to determine whether the jury should receive a special instruction with respect to the credibility of a young witness’ ”
- because ‘‘the defendant failed to request an evidentiary hearing at trial . . . [h]e [could not] demand a full evidentiary hearing for the first time on appeal’’
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Lavery, Sullivan
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
16 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. CeballosSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2003-10-21· cited 125×
- In Re Mark M.Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2001-10-05· cited 96×
- State v. NguyenSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2000-07-18· cited 50×
- Tevolini v. TevoliniConnecticut Appellate Court· 2001-10-02· cited 36×
- State v. CorbinConnecticut Appellate Court· 2001-01-30· cited 14×
- Levine v. LevineConnecticut Appellate Court· 2005-03-22· cited 13×
- State v. TinsleyConnecticut Appellate Court· 2000-07-25· cited 12×
- Kopacz v. Day Kimball Hospital of Windham County, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court· 2001-07-17· cited 12×
- State v. MincewiczConnecticut Appellate Court· 2001-08-07· cited 10×
- State v. JenkinsConnecticut Appellate Court· 2007-11-20· cited 9×
- Clark v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia· 1999-11-30· cited 8×
- State v. SunConnecticut Appellate Court· 2005-12-20· cited 7×
- State v. McCownConnecticut Appellate Court· 2002-04-02· cited 6×
- State v. LoweConnecticut Appellate Court· 2001-01-02· cited 5×
- State v. Hoa Van NguyenSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1999-04-14· cited 1×
- Alston v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court· 2025-12-09
Cites
49 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court· 1973-02-21· cited 5,756×
- Washington v. TexasSupreme Court· 1967-06-12· cited 3,395×
- Holder v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1893-10-30· cited 250×
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1995-12-19· cited 163×
- United States v. BlascoEleventh Circuit· 1983-04-18· cited 163×
- State v. ColtonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1995-08-08· cited 130×
- State v. FalbySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1982-05-04· cited 129×
- United States v. Troy Dennis Cropp, United States of America v. Clyde Garcia Cropp, United States of America v. Monte Clay MosleyFourth Circuit· 1997-10-10· cited 125×
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1975-08-05· cited 123×
- State v. JamesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1989-06-20· cited 120×
- Willie Rosario v. Robert Kuhlman, Superintendent, Sullivan Correctional Facility, DefendantSecond Circuit· 1988-02-12· cited 114×
- State v. ColtonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-08-17· cited 112×
- Lonnie Joe Dutton v. John N. Brown and the Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma, Oklahoma Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, Amicus CuriaeTenth Circuit· 1987-02-19· cited 109×
- United States v. Augustus Charles Bobo, Jimmy Hancock, Jimmy Bruce Rowan, and Robert W. KenningtonFifth Circuit· 1979-01-29· cited 94×
- Mason Braswell v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of FloridaFifth Circuit· 1972-07-07· cited 89×
- State v. BovaSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1997-03-18· cited 80×
- State v. AillonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1987-03-03· cited 73×
- State v. CarterSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1994-02-01· cited 69×
- United States v. Patrick Rugiero (92-2412) Ara Basmajian (92-2414)Sixth Circuit· 1994-06-08· cited 60×
- State v. PikulSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1962-12-04· cited 60×
Other cases named State v. Hoa Van Nguyen
1 other CourtListener record shares this case 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.