Connecticut Appellate Court· 12/24/2002
State v. Melendez
Citations
- 74 Conn. App. 215
- 811 A.2d 261
- 2002 Conn. App. LEXIS 629
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- claim that consciousness of guilt instruction, as given, was inappropriate not renewable when counsel objected only generally to charge and not to actual instruction after it was given
- when defendant objected generally to giving jury instruction on consciousness of guilt but did not object to wording of charge actually given, claim of instructional error was not preserved
- “[i]t is axiomatic that a factfinder may infer an intent to kill from circumstantial evidence such as the type of weapon used, the manner in which it was used, the type of wound inflicted and the events leading to and immediately following the death” [internal quotation marks omitted]
- \[T]he defendant's fleeing the scene [of the murder] and subsequent flight to Puerto Rico are evidence of his consciousness of guilt. 'We have in the past considered consciousness of guilt evidence as part of the evidence from which a jury may draw an inference of an intent to kill.' \
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Foti
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2008-08-05· cited 62×
- Lin v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2006-01-31· cited 20×
- Melendez v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court· 2013-04-09· cited 18×
- State v. LindoConnecticut Appellate Court· 2003-03-11· cited 13×
- State v. Aaron L.Connecticut Appellate Court· 2003-09-16· cited 12×
- Kos v. Lawrence + Memorial HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2020-03-10· cited 10×
- State v. RobinsonConnecticut Appellate Court· 2010-12-14· cited 7×
- State v. TerryConnecticut Appellate Court· 2015-12-22
Cites
20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court· 1986-04-07· cited 7,102×
- State v. WhistnantSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1980-02-12· cited 230×
- State v. SivriSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1994-08-23· cited 184×
- State v. HinesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1998-03-03· cited 182×
- State v. PinnockSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1992-01-14· cited 150×
- State v. GreenfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-12-07· cited 117×
- State v. ReidSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1984-07-17· cited 108×
- State v. FrancisSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-12-14· cited 79×
- State v. CerretaSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2002-05-21· cited 67×
- State v. DeJesusSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1996-03-05· cited 54×
- State v. MontanezSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1991-05-28· cited 50×
- State v. SmallSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1997-07-29· cited 47×
- Mazzucco v. Krall Coal & Oil Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1977-02-08· cited 40×
- State v. PattersonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1994-05-03· cited 40×
- State v. RaySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-12-21· cited 20×
- State v. BestConnecticut Appellate Court· 2000-02-29· cited 18×
- State v. AbernathyConnecticut Appellate Court· 2002-10-15· cited 16×
- State v. SolekConnecticut Appellate Court· 2001-10-02· cited 14×
- State v. PittConnecticut Appellate Court· 1992-09-01· cited 11×
- State v. HallowellConnecticut Appellate Court· 2001-01-23· cited 8×
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.