From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Leniart

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Oct 4, 2016
323 Conn. 918 (Conn. 2016)

Opinion

10-04-2016

STATE of Connecticut v. George Michael LENIART

Stephen M. Carney, senior assistant state's attorney, in support of the petition. Lauren Weisfeld, chief of legal services, in opposition.


Stephen M. Carney, senior assistant state's attorney, in support of the petition.

Lauren Weisfeld, chief of legal services, in opposition.

The petition by the state of Connecticut for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 166 Conn.App. 142, 140 A.3d 1026 (2016), is granted, limited to the following issues:

"1. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the trial court erroneously excluded a witness' polygraph test interview?

"2. If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the ruling substantially affected the verdict?

"3. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the trial court erroneously excluded expert testimony regarding jailhouse informant testimony?

"4. If the answer to the third question is in the affirmative, did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the exclusion of such testimony substantially affected the verdict?"


Summaries of

State v. Leniart

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Oct 4, 2016
323 Conn. 918 (Conn. 2016)
Case details for

State v. Leniart

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Connecticut v. George Michael LENIART

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Oct 4, 2016

Citations

323 Conn. 918 (Conn. 2016)
150 A.3d 1149

Citing Cases

State v. Leniart

"[Our Supreme Court] granted the state's petition for certification to appeal, limited to the questions of…

State v. Leniart

We granted the state's petition for certification to appeal, limited to the questions of whether the…