Supreme Court of Connecticut· 5/4/1993

State v. Joyner

Citations

225 Conn. 450
625 A.2d 791
1993 Conn. LEXIS 129

How courts have described this case

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

explaining that, in accordance with writings of Swift, insanity is common-law defense
explaining that, in accordance with writings of Swift, insanity is common-law defense
“[b]orrowing the methodology of Mathews” in concluding that requiring criminal defendant to prove his insanity defense by preponderance of evidence does not violate state constitutional right to due process
\[b]orrowing the methodology of Mathews \ in concluding that requiring criminal defendant to prove his insanity defense by preponderance of evidence does not violate state constitutional right to due process
upholding under the state constitution the placement of the burden to disprove sanity on the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence
upholding a statute imposing on the defendant in a criminal prosecution the burden of establishing the defense of mental disease or defect

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Berdon, Peters

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

88 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

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

Other cases named State v. Joyner

62 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.