History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. McClendon
243 Conn. 943
Conn.
1997
Check Treatment

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 45 Conn. App. 658 (AC 15529), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that, under the circumstances of this case, the trial court correctly held there was probable cause to support a warrant authorizing the seizure of the defendant for lineup and voice sample?

“2. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that, under the circumstances of this case, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to permit the defendant from introducing a police report under the residual exception to the hearsay rule?

“3. Did the Appellate Court properly affirm the trial court’s refusal to admit expert testimony on the subject of eyewitness identification and memory retention?”

Case Details

Case Name: State v. McClendon
Court Name: Supreme Court of Connecticut
Date Published: Nov 6, 1997
Citation: 243 Conn. 943
Docket Number: SC 15817
Court Abbreviation: Conn.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.