From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Pond

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Nov 27, 2012
307 Conn. 933 (Conn. 2012)

Opinion

2012-11-27

STATE of Connecticut v. Terrell Williams POND.

Leonard C. Boyle, deputy chief state's attorney, in support of the petition. Timothy H. Everett, assigned counsel, Kevin Munn, certified legal intern, and Bryce Petrucelli, certified legal intern, in opposition.


Leonard C. Boyle, deputy chief state's attorney, in support of the petition. Timothy H. Everett, assigned counsel, Kevin Munn, certified legal intern, and Bryce Petrucelli, certified legal intern, in opposition.

The petition by the state of Connecticut for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 138 Conn.App. 228, 50 A.3d 950, is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly determine that in order to convict a defendant of conspiracy to commit robbery in the second degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a–48(a) and 53a–135(a)(2), the state must prove that the defendant conspirator had the specific intent that there would be a display or threat of the use of what was represented to be a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, even if that specific intent is not required for proof of the underlying crime of robbery in the second degree?”


Summaries of

State v. Pond

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Nov 27, 2012
307 Conn. 933 (Conn. 2012)
Case details for

State v. Pond

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Connecticut v. Terrell Williams POND.

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Nov 27, 2012

Citations

307 Conn. 933 (Conn. 2012)
56 A.3d 714

Citing Cases

State v. Mendez

The robbery in the first degree statute, § 53a–134 (a)(1), requires a perpetrator to cause serious physical…

State v. Pond

We granted the state's petition for certification to appeal, limited to the following question: “Did the…