Skip to main content

State v. Lizotte

Citations

  • 200 Conn. 734
  • 517 A.2d 610
  • 1986 Conn. LEXIS 906

How courts have described this case

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

  • neither language nor legislative history supported conclusion that statute was intended to have retroactive effect
  • neither language nor legislative history supported conclusion that statute was intended to have retroactive effect
  • “[w]e consistently have stated that we will not consider evidentiary rulings where counsel did not properly preserve a claim of error by objection and exception”
  • ‘‘we will not consider evidentiary rulings where counsel did not properly preserve a claim of error by objection’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Santaniello

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named State v. Lizotte

10 other CourtListener records share 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.