From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marquez v. Comm'r of Corr.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Mar 1, 2017
324 Conn. 925 (Conn. 2017)

Opinion

03-01-2017

Julian MARQUEZ v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

James E. Mortimer, assigned counsel, in support of the petition. Sarah Hanna, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.


James E. Mortimer, assigned counsel, in support of the petition.

Sarah Hanna, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.

The petitioner Julian Marquez' petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 170 Conn. App. 231, 154 A.3d 73 (2017), is granted, limited to the following issues:

"1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the habeas court did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner's petition for certification to appeal?

"2. If not, did the habeas court properly find that the state did not fail to disclose, in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed. 2d 215 (1963), and its progeny, material impeachment evidence concerning plea discussions between the state and a key state's witness?"


Summaries of

Marquez v. Comm'r of Corr.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Mar 1, 2017
324 Conn. 925 (Conn. 2017)
Case details for

Marquez v. Comm'r of Corr.

Case Details

Full title:Julian MARQUEZ v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Mar 1, 2017

Citations

324 Conn. 925 (Conn. 2017)
324 Conn. 925

Citing Cases

Marquez v. Dougherty

The Connecticut Supreme Court then granted Petitioner's petition for certification for appeal on March 1,…

Marquez v. Comm'r of Corr.

Second, "[i]f not, did the habeas court properly find that the state did not fail to disclose, in violation…