State v. Khadijah

• Decision Date: 20 November 2007
• Docket Number: No. 17801.,17801.
• Citation: 934 A.2d 241,284 Conn. 429
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE of Connecticut v. Ayanna KHADIJAH.

934 A.2d 241

284 Conn. 429

STATE of Connecticut v. Ayanna KHADIJAH.

No. 17801.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Argued October 25, 2007.

Decided November 20, 2007.

Substitute information charging the defendant with the crimes of possession of narcotics, possession of less than four ounces of marijuana, risk of injury to a child and failure to appear in the first degree, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Stamford-Norwalk, geographical area number twenty, where the state entered a nolled prosequi as to the charges for possession of narcotics, possession of less than four ounces of marijuana and risk of injury to a child; thereafter, the matter was tried to a jury before Wilson, J.; verdict and judgment of guilty of failure to appear in the first degree, from which the defendant appealed to the Appellate Court, Flynn, C.J., and DiPentima and Dupont, Js., which reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case with direction to render judgment of not guilty, and the state, on the granting of certification, appealed to this court.

John A. East III, senior assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, were David I. Cohen, state's attorney, and Suzanne M. Vieux, assistant state's attorney, for the appellant (state).

Mary Anne Royle, special public defender, for the appellee (defendant).

KATZ, PALMER, VERTEFEUILLE, ZARELLA and SCHALLER, Js.

PER CURIAM.

The state appeals, following our grant of its petition for certification,¹ from the judgment of the Appellate Court reversing the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of the defendant, Ayanna Khadijah, of failure to appear in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-172 (a)(1).² State v Khadijah, 98 Conn.App. 409, 909 A.2d 65 (2006). On appeal, the state claims that the Appellate Court improperly concluded that, based on the facts of this case, there was insufficient evidence from which the jury could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that one of the elements of § 53a-172 (a)(1), namely, "wilfully fails to appear," was proven. See id., at 419, 909 A.2d 65.

After examining the entire record on appeal and considering the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, we have determined that the appeal in this case should be dismissed on the ground that certification was improvidently granted.

The appeal is dismissed.

1. We granted the state's petition for certification to appeal, limited to the following issue: "Did the Appellate...