Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

209 Conn. 801

State v. Golding

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided September 20, 1988

Supreme Court of Connecticut · decided 1988-09-20

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently April 1989

2 state decisions

Relies on State v. Golding

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1988-09-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 14 Conn. App. 272, is granted, limited to the following issue:

¶2“Where, in a prosecution for general assistance fraud (Section 17-282) the jury was never instructed concerning a finding of ‘the amount involved,’ did the Appellate Court err in refusing to reverse the defendant’s conviction on the ground of the lack of such an instruction and did it err in refusing to review the defendant’s claim that under the United States and Connecticut constitutions ‘the amount *802involved,’ is necessarily an essential element of the offense since it determines whether the offense is a misdemeanor or a crime as serious as a class B felony?”

Joseph G. Bruckman, assistant public defender, in support of the petition.Mary H. Lesser, deputy assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.Decided September 20, 1988
/209/conn/801 · .json · Public domain