State v. Morris

CourtConnecticut Supreme Court
CitationState v. Morris, 720 A.2d 516, 247 Conn. 904 (Conn. 1998)
Decision Date15 September 1998
PartiesSTATE of Connecticut v. William MORRIS.

Donald Dakers, Special Public Defender, in support of the petition.

Carolyn K. Longstreth, Assistant State's Attorney, in opposition.

The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 49 Conn.App. 409, 716 A.2d 897 (1998), is denied.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
18 cases
  • State v. Barnett, (AC 16926)
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • June 1, 1999
    ...of two crimes warranting two separate punishments. See State v. Morris, 49 Conn. App. 409, 420, 716 A.2d 897, cert. denied, 247 Conn. 904, 720 A.2d 516 (1998). Accordingly, we conclude that the defendant's conviction under both subdivisions (1) and (4) of § 53a-59 (a) does not violate his r......
  • State v. Jose A. B.
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • March 22, 2022
    ...a ‘ "sexual and indecent manner" ’ ... prohibited by the risk of injury to a child statute" (citation omitted)), cert. denied, 247 Conn. 904, 720 A.2d 516 (1998) ; see also State v. James , 211 Conn. 555, 586, 560 A.2d 426 (1989) ("[S]pecific intent is not an element of the crime defined in......
  • State v. Alvaro F.
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • March 31, 2009
    ...901, 838 A.2d 211(2003). Similarly, the Appellate Court in State v. Morris, 49 Conn.App. 409, 419, 716 A.2d 897, cert. denied, 247 Conn. 904, 720 A.2d 516 (1998), concluded that risk of injury to a child under General Statutes (Rev. to 1991) § 53-219 did not constitute the same offense as s......
  • State v. Ryan
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • June 1, 1999
    ...806, cert. denied, 216 Conn. 807, 580 A.2d 64 (1990)." State v. Morris, 49 Conn. App. 409, 415, 716 A.2d 897, cert. denied, 247 Conn. 904, 720 A.2d 516 (1998). The trial court's decision to allow an amendment to the information to conform to the evidence is subject to reversal only for an a......
  • Get Started for Free