Opinion
Decided July 11, 1990
The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 21 Conn. App. 299, is granted, limited to the following issues:
"1. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the evidence adduced at trial to prove identification was sufficient to sustain, logically and beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury's guilty verdict on first degree robbery and conspiracy to commit first degree robbery?
"2. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that evidence of a coparticipant's use or threatened use of a tire iron was sufficient to sustain the defendant's conviction of conspiracy to commit first degree robbery, in violation of C.G.S. 53a-48 and 53a-134 (a)(3), where that theory of liability was neither charged in the information nor instructed upon at trial?"
Timothy H. Everett and Dana E. Shaw, certified legal intern, in support of the petition.
Mitchell S. Brody, assistant state's attorney, in Opposition.