State v. Weston

Decision Date10 April 1973
Citation325 A.2d 457,164 Conn. 635
CourtConnecticut Supreme Court
PartiesSTATE of Connecticut v. Charles WESTON.

Igor I. Sikorsky, Jr., Special Public Defender, for the appellant (defendant).

Jerrold H. Barnett, Asst. State's Atty., with whom, on the brief, were Arnold Markle, State's Atty., and John J. Kelly, Asst. State's Atty., for the appellee (state).

Before HOUSE, C.J., and SHAPIRO, LOISELLE, MacDONALD and BOGDANSKI, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Upon a jury trial, the defendant was convicted of the crime of selling heroin in violation of § 19-480(a) of the General Statutes and has appealed from that conviction.

We find ourselves in complete agreement with the concluding sentences of the state's brief on this appeal: 'The claims assigned as error have not been briefed and therefore should be treated as abandoned. Hartford National Bank & Trust Company v. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Bristol, 164 Conn. (--, 321 A.2d 469) (34 Conn.L.J. . . . No. 35, p. 1). The claims presented, aside from their lack of substance, have not been assigned as error and therefore should not be considered. Practice Book § 651; Lassow v. Bulkley, 132 Conn. 476, 478 (45 A.2d 714).'

Notwithstanding this situation, we have considered the substance of the arguments pressed by the defendant in argument on the appeal and conclude that they are without merit or have been sufficiently answered by the decisions of this court in State v. Brown, 163 Conn. 52, 301 A.2d 547, and State v. Cari, 163 Conn. 174, 303 A.2d 7.

There is no error.

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • State v. Moye
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • 9 Octubre 1979
    ...court to consider that claimed error, not simply as a matter of procedure; Practice Book, 1978, §§ 3054(c)(3), 3063; State v. Weston, 164 Conn. 635, 636, 325 A.2d 457 (1973); State v. Grayton, 163 Conn. 104, 109, 302 A.2d 246, cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1045, 93 S.Ct. 542, 34 L.Ed.2d 495 (1972)......
  • State v. Ralls
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • 31 Diciembre 1974
    ...sixty-three assignments of error advanced by the defendant, thirty have not been briefed and are considered abandoned. State v. Weston, 164 Conn. 635, 636, 325 A.2d 457; State v. Bitting, 162 Conn. 1, 3, 291 A.2d The remaining thirty-three assignments of error, variously presented, form the......
  • Morrissey-Manter v. Saint Francis Hosp. & Med. Ctr.
    • United States
    • Appellate Court of Connecticut
    • 28 Junio 2016
    ...See Barros v. Barros, 309 Conn. 499, 503 n. 4, 72 A.3d 367 (2013) (claim deemed abandoned for inadequate briefing); State v. Weston, 164 Conn. 635, 636, 325 A.2d 457 (1973) (claim not briefed on appeal, although argued during oral argument, treated as abandoned); Braham v. Newbould, 160 Con......
  • Olson v. Mohammadu
    • United States
    • Appellate Court of Connecticut
    • 8 Noviembre 2016
    ...Barros v. Barros , 309 Conn. 499, 503 n.4, 72 A.3d 367 (2013) (claim deemed abandoned for inadequate briefing); State v. Weston , 164 Conn. 635, 636, 325 A.2d 457 (1973) (claim not briefed on appeal, although argued during oral argument, treated as abandoned); Braham v. Newbould , 160 Conn.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT