State v. Delgado
| Decision Date | 20 September 1972 |
| Citation | 297 A.2d 75,163 Conn. 641 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE of Connecticut v. Roberto DELGADO. |
The Supreme Court of the United States has issued an order dated June 29, 1972, in the case of Delgado v. Connecticut, 408 U.S. 940, 92 S.Ct. 2879, 33 L.Ed.2d 764, as follows: The
The original judgment in State v. Delgado, 161 Conn. 536, 290 A.2d 338, was rendered by the Superior Court for Hartford County on December 7, 1967, and the judgment of this court dated November 23, 1971, found no error in the judgment rendered by the Superior Court. The judgment of this court now having been vacated insofar as it left undisturbed the death penalty imposed by the Superior Court for Hartford County and the case having been remanded for further proceedings, it is ordered, that the judgment of the Superior Court dated December 7, 1967, be set aside insofar as it imposed the death penalty and the cause is remanded to the Superior Court for Hartford County for further proceedings and the imposition of penalty, all not inconsistent with the order of the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Delgado v. Connecticut.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Pastet
...the death penalty and then remanded each case to the Superior Court for further proceedings and the imposition of penalty. State v. Delgado, 163 Conn. 641, 297 A.2d 75; State v. Davis, 163 Conn. 642, 316 A.2d On September 15, 1972, the defendant filed a motion in this court to 'reopen' the ......
-
State v. Cofone
...for the limited purpose of resentencing the defendant to a term of life imprisonment. See the orders of this court in State v. Delgado, 163 Conn. 641, 297 A.2d 75, State v. Davis, 163 Conn. --, 316 A.2d The defendant's assignment of error concerning the imposition of the death penalty does ......
-
Davis v. Bryan
...limited purpose of resentencing the defendant to a term of life imprisonment.") (emphasis added) (citing Davis III; State v. Delgado, 163 Conn. 641, 297 A.2d 75 (1972)). The Pastet III court noted that the savings clause of Sec. 1-1(t) mandated the application of those parts of the repealed......
-
State v. Hall
...161 Conn. 536, 540, 290 A.2d 338, vacated in part and remanded (on other grounds), 408 U.S. 940, 92 S.Ct. 2879, 33 L.Ed.2d 764; 163 Conn. 641, 297 A.2d 75; State v. Marquez, 160 Conn. 47, 273 A.2d 689; Heating Acceptance Corporation v. Patterson, 152 Conn. 467, 469-472, 208 A.2d 341. In bot......