State v. Chapman

Citation223 Conn. 923,614 A.2d 827
CourtConnecticut Supreme Court
Decision Date17 September 1992
PartiesSTATE of Connecticut v. Donald CHAPMAN.

Lawrence J. Tytla, Asst. State's Atty., in support of the petition.

Ira B. Grudberg and Thomas W. Ude, Jr., New Haven, in opposition.

The state of Connecticut's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 28 Conn.App. 360, 610 A.2d 1328, is granted, limited to the following issues:

"1. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the statutory alternative analysis set forth in State v. Williams, 202 Conn. 349, 363-64, 521 A.2d 150 (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?

"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?"

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • State v. Chapman
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • May 18, 1994
    ...in its failure to consider whether any error in the trial court's charge was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt?" State v. Chapman, 223 Conn. 923, 614 A.2d 827 (1992). We affirmed the judgment of the Appellate Court and concluded, with two justices dissenting, that "the trial court improper......
  • State v. Chapman
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • September 7, 1993
    ...in its failure to consider whether any error in the trial court's charge was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt?" State v. Chapman, 223 Conn. 923, 614 A.2d 827 (1992). We conclude that the trial court improperly instructed the jury on a statutory alternative for which the defendant was not ......
  • State v. Oliver, 13048
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • May 28, 1996
    ... ... United States, 502 U.S. 46, 112 S.Ct. 466, 116 L.Ed.2d 371 (1991); State v. Chapman, 229 Conn. 529, 539, 643 A.2d 1213 (1994). Because we have already concluded that one of the statutory alternatives given to the jury was supported by sufficient evidence, we conclude that the defendant has not been denied due process under the federal constitution ...         The ... ...
  • State v. Dinoto
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • June 7, 1994
    ...360, 610 A.2d 1328 (1992), with the knowledge that certification to appeal had been granted on that case. See State v. Chapman, 223 Conn. 923, 614 A.2d 827 (1992). The state thereafter petitioned this court for certification, which we granted, limited to the following three issues: "(1) Und......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT