Serrano & Serrano, LLC - Connecticut Lawyers - Accidents, Divorce, Social Security Disability, Immigration, Bankruptcy - Hartford 860 236-9350 * Waterbury 203 729-6100 * Toll-Free 800 856-6400

Connecticut Attorneys Summarize Recent Cases: Personal Injury, Family Law, Social Security Disability & SSI, Workers Compensation, Immigration, Bankruptcy, Criminal Law & DWI / DUI

Serrano & Serrano, LLC  -  Connecticut Lawyers  -  Accidents, Divorce, Social Security Disability, Immigration, Bankruptcy - Hartford 860 236-9350 * Waterbury 203 729-6100 * Toll-Free 800 856-6400 header image

Defendant Found to be Drug Dependent Even Though Denied Using Narcotics

April 10th, 2009 No Comments

   For Criminal Law Help Click This Line 

Case:  State v. Ray (SC 17905) March 2009

Court:  Connecticut Supreme Court

Trial Court:  Stamford

Synopsis:  Although he denied using drugs and held down a job at times, the defendant was found to be drug dependent as he was in and out of treatment since the 1980’s and recently had been unfavorably discharged from a rehab program.  The court also held that the State did not have to prove  a lack of drug dependency beyond a reasonable doubt even though the penalties are greater for non-drug dependent persons.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR290/290CR16S.pdf

Tags:   · · ·

Warrantless Search of Car Valid Where Driver Left Car, Sold Drugs and Immediately Returned to Car

January 31st, 2009 No Comments

   For Criminal Law Help Click This Line 

Case:  State v. Wilson (AC 28554) December 2008

Court:  Connecticut Appellate Court

Trial Court:  Bridgeport

Synopsis:  A warrantless search of a vehicle was constitutional under the following conditions: (1) an individual told an undercover police officer that a man would be arriving with crack cocaine for sale; (2) the driver arrived moments later in a vehicle; (3) the driver walked into a restaurant and sold crack cocaine to several persons, including the undercover officer; (4) the driver left the restaurant and immediately walked back toward his vehicle; (5) the dreiver fled after seeing a police officer, throwing away a cell phone that contained packets of crack cocaine; (6) the defendant was searched and had a key to the vehicle.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROap/AP111/111AP74.pdf

Tags:   · · · ·

Drug charges upheld against backseat passenger sitting near narcotics.

October 19th, 2008 No Comments

   For Criminal Law Help Click This Line 

Case:  State v. Williams (AC 27628) 2008

Court:  Connecticut Appellate Court

Trial Court:  Stamford - Norwalk

Synopsis:  Conviction of possession of narcotics (cocaine and marijuana) with intent to sell was upheld against a backseat passenger of a car.  Although there were two frontseat occupants in the car, there was enough evidence to show the backseat passenger’s “constructive possession” of the narcotics.  The drugs were found on the backseat floor where the passenger’s feet had been, he had easier access to the drugs than the other occupants, he moved from one side of the backseat to the other after the police had stopped the car, he appeared “fidgety” and he gave the police a false first name

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROap/AP110/110AP513.pdf

Tags:   · · · · ·