From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rose v. Comm'r of Corr.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Mar 2, 2021
336 Conn. 920 (Conn. 2021)

Opinion

03-02-2021

Steven W. ROSE v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

Vishal K. Garg, assigned counsel, West Hartford, in support of the petition. Melissa L. Streeto, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition.


Vishal K. Garg, assigned counsel, West Hartford, in support of the petition.

Melissa L. Streeto, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition.

The petitioner Steven W. Rose's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 202 Conn. App. 436, ––– A.3d –––– (2021), is granted, limited to the following issues:

"1. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the habeas court had correctly found that the petitioner did not establish good cause necessary to excuse the delay in filing under General Statutes § 52-470 (e) ?

"2. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that abuse of discretion is the appropriate standard of review for dismissals of habeas petitions pursuant to § 52-470 (e) ?"


Summaries of

Rose v. Comm'r of Corr.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Mar 2, 2021
336 Conn. 920 (Conn. 2021)
Case details for

Rose v. Comm'r of Corr.

Case Details

Full title:Steven W. ROSE v. COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Mar 2, 2021

Citations

336 Conn. 920 (Conn. 2021)
336 Conn. 920

Citing Cases

Rose v. Comm'r of Corr.

See id., at 443–45, 245 A.3d 917. We granted the petitioner's petition for certification to appeal to…