From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Henderson

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jun 28, 2017
173 A.3d 389 (Conn. 2017)

Opinion

06-28-2017

STATE of Connecticut v. Mitchell HENDERSON

Judie Marshall and Walter Bansley IV, assigned counsel, in support of the petition. James M. Ralls, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.


Judie Marshall and Walter Bansley IV, assigned counsel, in support of the petition.

James M. Ralls, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.

The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 173 Conn. App. 119, 163 A.3d 74 (2017), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendant's sentence was not illegal, does not violate the double jeopardy clause, and does not run contrary to legislative intent?"

ESPINOSA, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.


Summaries of

State v. Henderson

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jun 28, 2017
173 A.3d 389 (Conn. 2017)
Case details for

State v. Henderson

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Connecticut v. Mitchell HENDERSON

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Jun 28, 2017

Citations

173 A.3d 389 (Conn. 2017)
326 Conn. 914

Citing Cases

State v. Henderson

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