State v. Chapman

Sep 17, 1992
Reporters:
, ,

The state of Connecticut’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate ‍​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‍Court, 28 Conn. App. 360, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the statutory alternative analysis ‍​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‍set forth in State v. *924Williams, 202 Conn. 349, 363-64 (1987), applied to alternative language occurring within the same statutory subsection and that the trial court’s ‍​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‍instruction permitted the jury to consider a separate and distinct theory of criminal liability?
Lawrence J. Tytla, assistant state’s attorney, in support of the ‍​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‍petition. Ira B. Grudberg and Thomas W. Ude, Jr., in opposition. Decided September 17, 1992
“2. Was the Appellate Court correct in its failure to consider whether any ‍​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌‍error in the trial court’s charge was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt?”