State v. Parnoff
| Decision Date | 30 November 2015 |
| Parties | STATE of Connecticut v. Laurence V. PARNOFF. |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
320 Conn. 901
127 A.3d 185 (Mem)
STATE of Connecticut
v.
Laurence V. PARNOFF.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Decided Nov. 30, 2015.
Mitchell S. Brody, senior assistant state's attorney, in support of the petition.
Norman A. Pattis, New Haven, in opposition.
The petition by the state of Connecticut for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 160 Conn.App. 270, 125 A.3d 573 (2015), is granted, limited to the following issue:
"Did the Appellate Court correctly determine in its de novo review of the record, that there was insufficient evidence to support the defendant's conviction for disorderly conduct pursuant to General Statutes § 53a–182 (a)(1) because the state's proof of that offense's threat element did not satisfy the first amendment's ‘fighting words' doctrine?"
To continue reading
Request your trial
- State v. Bagnaschi
- Davis v. Comm'r of Corr.
-
State v. Andriulaitis
...words that portend physical violence.' " State v. Parnoff, 160 Conn. App. 270, 276, 125 A.3d 573, cert. granted on other grounds, 320 Conn. 901, 127 A.3d 185 (2015). The requirement that the verbal statements portend some level of physical violence "is consistent with the fighting words lim......