State v. Griffin
Decision Date | 05 April 2005 |
Docket Number | No. 17052.,17052. |
Citation | 869 A.2d 640,273 Conn. 266 |
Parties | STATE of Connecticut v. Cyrus GRIFFIN. |
Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
Moira L. Buckley, for the appellant (defendant).
Christopher T. Godialis, Assistant State's Attorney, with whom, on the brief, was Michael Dearington, State's Attorney, for the appellee (state).
BORDEN, NORCOTT, KATZ, PALMER and ZARELLA, Js.
A jury found the defendant, Cyrus Griffin, guilty of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-55a (a)1 and carrying a pistol without a permit in violation of General Statutes § 29-35.2 The trial court rendered judgment3 in accordance with the jury verdict, from which the defendant appealed to the Appellate Court, claiming, inter alia, that the trial court improperly had excluded certain expert testimony during the hearing on the defendant's motion to suppress his oral confession to the police following his arrest.4 The Appellate Court rejected the defendant's claim; State v. Griffin, 77 Conn.App. 424, 428, 823 A.2d 419 (2003); and we granted the defendant's petition for certification to appeal limited to that issue. State v. Griffin, 265 Conn. 910, 831 A.2d 252 (2003). We affirm the judgment of the Appellate Court.
The opinion of the Appellate Court sets forth the following facts that the jury reasonably could have found. "At or around 2 p.m. on January 29, 1998, Denard Lester, accompanied by the defendant, robbed the eighteen year old victim, Tyshan Allbrooks, in New Haven. Lester took from the victim what witnesses described as a necklace or a medallion made of gold. The victim immediately went to a friend's nearby house, reported the incident to the police and, during an interview, provided a statement to the police who had responded to her complaint. After the robbery, the defendant, Lester and Tobias Greene were passengers in an automobile being operated by Paul Little. The defendant and Lester were fourteen years of age; Greene and Little were sixteen years of age.
State v. Griffin, supra, 77 Conn.App. at 427, 823 A.2d 419.
The Appellate Court opinion also sets forth the following additional relevant facts and procedural history. "Prior to trial, on April 5, 1999, the defendant filed a motion to suppress `potential testimony and other evidence of any statements made by the [d]efendant.' It is not contradicted that, on February 2, 1998, police detectives arrested the defendant in an apartment in New Haven after they [had] discovered him hiding in a closet. The police thereafter took the defendant to the New Haven police department where Detectives Leroy Dease and Gilbert Burton interviewed him. At trial, Dease testified that the defendant told him that Lester had taken the victim's necklace from her and that after the robbery, the defendant, Lester, Greene and Little drove around New Haven. Dease further testified that the defendant told him that Greene, upon observing the victim walking across an intersection, [had] ordered [the defendant] to get out of the car and shoot the victim. Dease then testified that the defendant confessed that he [had] followed the victim [into] the convenience store and, with Greene standing nearby, `pulled out his small pistol and shot [the victim] several times.' According to Dease, the defendant also told him that he was afraid that Greene was going to shoot him and believed that Greene had ordered him to shoot the victim because [the defendant] owed Greene $300. Burton testified that he was present during the defendant's arrest and interview, and testified as to the circumstances under which the defendant [had] made his confession.
"The defendant supported his motion to suppress by asserting [inter alia] that he had made the statements, in which he confessed to having shot the victim ... involuntarily in violation of his due process rights...." Id., at 427-28, 823 A.2d 419.
Id., at 429-30, 823 A.2d 419. Id., at 430 n. 4, 823 A.2d 419.
State v. Griffin, supra, 77 Conn.App. at 430-31, 823 A.2d 419.
The trial court granted in part and denied in part the defendant's motion to suppress. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Martinez
...issue ... is the type of evidence contemplated by Porter.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Griffin, 273 Conn. 266, 276, 869 A.2d 640 (2005). Since Porter, there have been two lines of cases in which our courts have determined that a Porter hearing is unnecess......
-
State v. Watson
...(Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Furbush , 131 Conn. App. 733, 754, 27 A.3d 497 (2011) ; see also State v. Griffin , 273 Conn. 266, 276, 869 A.2d 640 (2005).In his argument at the Porter hearing, defense counsel stated that Allard was not offering a scientific opinion. The court......
-
State v. Williams
...case in which it is offered, and not simply be valid in the abstract.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Griffin, 273 Conn. 266, 275–76, 869 A.2d 640 (2005). With respect to the preclusion of expert testimony, “[w]e will make every reasonable presumption in favor of upholding the......
-
State v. Guilbert
...scientific in nature for the purposes of evidentiary admissibility.'' (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Griffin, 273 Conn. 266, 278, 869 A.2d 640 (2005). Although not all of the methods underlying all of the studies pertaining to eyewitness identification are beyond the ken of th......
-
2005 Connecticut Appellate Review
...there were numerous major decisions, only two of which involved vigorous dissents. One of 87 Horton & Bartschi, supra note 43, at 37. 88 273 Conn. 266, 869 A.2d 640 (2005). 89 269 Conn. 154, 847 A.2d 978 (2004). 90 273 Conn. 138 (2005). 91 271 Conn. 724, 859 A.2d 898 (2004). 92 276 Conn. 45......
-
An Overview of Alabama's New Daubert-based Admissibility Standard
...rather than experience-based because expert "held himself out as an expert in fire sciences") (emphasis in opinion). State v. Griffin, 869 A.2d 640, 647 (Conn. 2005) (applying analysis state used under Frye standard to determine whether expert evidence is scientific); Malinski v. State, 794......
-
CHAPTER 4 THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD AND "JUNK SCIENCE"
...No. 2004-KA-02081, 2006 LEXIS 88 (Miss App. 2006).[62] . N.J. v. Moore, 902 A.2d 1212 (N.J. Sup. 2006).[63] . Conn. v. Griffin, 869 A.2d 640 (Conn. Sup. 2004).[64] . Pa. v. Dengler, 890 A.2d 372 (Pa. Sup. 2005).[65] . N.Y. v. Kogut, 806 N.Y.S.2d 353 (Supreme Ct. 2005).[66] . Richard Gray, "......