From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Marrero

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Oct 20, 2020
335 Conn. 961 (Conn. 2020)

Opinion

10-20-2020

STATE of Connecticut v. Nector MARRERO

Julia K. Conlin, assigned counsel, and Emily Graner Sexton, assigned counsel, in support of the petition. Sarah Hanna, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition.


Julia K. Conlin, assigned counsel, and Emily Graner Sexton, assigned counsel, in support of the petition.

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

The defendant's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 198 Conn. App. 90, 234 A.3d 1 (2020), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the prosecutor's asking leading questions of a hostile witness during direct examination did not constitute prosecutorial impropriety?"

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


Summaries of

State v. Marrero

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Oct 20, 2020
335 Conn. 961 (Conn. 2020)
Case details for

State v. Marrero

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Connecticut v. Nector MARRERO

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Oct 20, 2020

Citations

335 Conn. 961 (Conn. 2020)
239 A.3d 1214

Citing Cases

State v. Marrero

We granted the defendant's petition for certification to appeal from the judgment of the Appellate Court,…