State v. Lanier
Citations
- 347 Conn. 179
Syllabus
Convicted of the crime of burglary in the second degree, the defendant appealed to the Appellate Court, claiming, inter alia, that the trial court had violated his constitutional rights to confrontation, to present a defense, and to a fair trial when it limited defense counsel's cross- examination of the victim with respect to matters pertaining to the victim's bias and motive to fabricate allegations against the defendant. The victim, who had been serving probation for a felony conviction, encountered the defendant, with whom he was acquainted, and another individual, M, at a bar, when the defendant asked the victim if he could borrow some money. The victim gave the defendant twenty dollars and remarked that he had additional money at home that he was saving for his rent. When the bar closed, they all went to the defendant's apartment, where M struck the victim several times and accused him of stealing his wrist watch. The defendant and M then ordered the victim to take them to the victim's apartment, and, when they arrived, the defendant demanded that the victim give him his money. The victim gave the defendant an envelope containing $800 in $100 and $50 bills. The defen- dant took some of the money and told the victim that he would hurt him if he contacted the police. Once the defendant and M departed, the victim called 911. A police officer responded to the call and encountered the defendant and M walking near the victim's apartment. The defendant continued to disregard the officer's multiple orders to stop and continued walking around a corner and onto a side street. A second police officer arrived on the scene, and, while that officer secured the defendant and M, the first officer searched the side street and discovered two $100 bills. In anticipation of trial, the defendant sought permission to question the victim concerning his prior felony conviction, his probationary status at the time of the incident, his arrests while on probation, and the specific condi
Judges: Robinson; McDonald; D’Auria; Mullins; Ecker; Alexander
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court· 1970-11-23· cited 9,465×
- Pointer v. TexasSupreme Court· 1965-04-05· cited 4,761×
- State v. SinghSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2002-03-26· cited 212×
- State v. FrancisSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-12-14· cited 79×
- State v. LongSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-08-11· cited 57×
- State v. PappasSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2001-07-24· cited 50×
- State v. LugoSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2003-12-09· cited 25×
- State v. BermudezSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2021-11-03· cited 23×
- State v. MARK R.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2011-04-19· cited 22×
- State of Connecticut v. David N.J.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2011-06-07· cited 19×
- State v. AbrahamSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2022-05-31· cited 17×
- State v. JordanSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2018-06-19· cited 14×
- State v. AyalaSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2019-09-24· cited 13×
- Barresi v. MaloneyD. Massachusetts· 2003-07-24· cited 3×
- State v. LanierConnecticut Appellate Court· 2021-07-06· cited 3×
- State v. TorresSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2022-05-10· cited 3×
- State v. GibsonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2021-08-23· cited 1×
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.