State v. Miller

Citations

• 229 Conn. App. 435

Syllabus

Convicted of the crimes of attempt to commit assault in the first degree and assault in the second degree, the defendant appealed. He claimed, inter alia, that the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress certain evidence, namely, the screwdriver used as a weapon in the assault. Held: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to suppress the testimony of a police officer at the evidentiary hearing on the motion having been sufficient to establish a reasonable probability that the screwdriver the state intended to offer into evidence was the one found at the scene and that it had not been changed or altered, thereby authenticat- ing it. This court declined to review the defendant's unpreserved claim that the trial court improperly allowed the state's expert witness to opine on an ultimate issue reserved for the jury. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting the state's expert witness to opine on a hypothetical question that allegedly omitted a material fact, as the court reasonably could have concluded that the question provided a fair summary of the relevant evidence and that the answer would assist the jury. The evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict as to the defendant's intent to cause serious physical injury as required to support his conviction of attempt to commit assault in the first degree. The evidence was sufficient to establish that the screwdriver was a danger- ous instrument as required to support the defendant's convictions of attempt to commit assault in the first degree and assault in the second degree. Argued October 8—officially released December 10, 2024