From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Bradley

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Feb 18, 2020
334 Conn. 925 (Conn. 2020)

Opinion

02-18-2020

STATE of Connecticut v. William Hyde BRADLEY

Naomi T. Fetterman, assigned counsel, in support of the petition. James M. Ralls, assistant state's attorney, in opposition.


Naomi T. Fetterman, assigned counsel, in support of the petition.

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

The defendant's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 195 Conn.App. 36, 223 A.3d 62 (2019), is granted, limited to the following issues:

"1. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the defendant did not have standing to raise a due process challenge to his prosecution under a criminal statute, namely, General Statutes § 21a-277 (b), that he claims was enacted for the purpose of discriminating against minority groups to which he does not belong?

"2. If the answer to the first question is ‘no,’ was § 21a-277 (b) enacted for the purpose of discriminating against African Americans and/or Mexican Americans?"


Summaries of

State v. Bradley

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Feb 18, 2020
334 Conn. 925 (Conn. 2020)
Case details for

State v. Bradley

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Connecticut v. William Hyde BRADLEY

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Feb 18, 2020

Citations

334 Conn. 925 (Conn. 2020)
223 A.3d 379

Citing Cases

State v. Bradley

And (2) "[i]f the answer to the first question is ‘no,’ was § 21a-277 (b) enacted for the purpose of…