midpage

State v. SpringState v. Spring

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Jan 23, 2019
Reporters:
,

The defendant's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 186 Conn. App. 197, 199 A.3d 21, is granted, limited to the following issues:

"1. Did the Appellate Court properly uphold the trial court's determination that the state met its burden of proving that the defendant's statement obtained during a custodial interrogation, which was not recorded in accordance with General Statutes § 54-1o, was nonetheless admissible pursuant to the provisions of General Statutes § 54-1o (h) ?

"2. Should this court exercise its supervisory authority over the administration of justice to require that, when a custodial interrogation subject to the provisions of General Statutes § 54-1o, is not recorded in accordance with that statute, a jury be instructed that it may consider the noncompliance with the recording requirement in determining the weight to accord a statement that is the product of the unrecorded custodial interrogation?"

ROBINSON, C.J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Spring
Court Name: Supreme Court of Connecticut
Date Published: Jan 23, 2019
Citations: 330 Conn. 963; 199 A.3d 1079
Court Abbreviation: Conn.
Log In