SC20766 - State v. Williams (Manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm; criminal
possession of a firearm; criminal possession of ammunition; carrying a pistol
without a permit in connection with a shooting incident; double jeopardy; “The principal issue on appeal is whether the
trial court erred in declining to give the jury an instruction on the defense
of self-defense with respect to the charge of manslaughter in the first degree
with a firearm when a third party was the victim of the shooting. The defendant
also claims that his conviction of both criminal possession of a firearm and
criminal possession of ammunition violates double jeopardy. We agree with the
defendant that the trial court erred in declining to provide the jury with a
self-defense instruction for the charge of manslaughter in the first degree
with a firearm and that this error was harmful. Therefore, we reverse the
defendant’s conviction of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm and
remand the case to the trial court for a new trial on that count. We also agree
with the defendant that his conviction of criminal possession of a firearm and
criminal possession of ammunition violates double jeopardy. Accordingly, we
vacate the defendant’s conviction of criminal possession of ammunition.”)
AC47220 - State v. Emmanuel C. (One count of risk of injury to a child; “On appeal, the
defendant claims that (1) there was insufficient evidence to support his
conviction, (2) the trial court improperly denied his renewed motions for a
bill of particulars, (3) the trial court improperly denied his motion for a
mistrial based on his allegation that the state failed to disclose certain impeachment
evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S. Ct.
1194, 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963), (4) the trial court abused its discretion in
admitting certain photographs into evidence, and (5) the trial court improperly
denied his request for judicial recusal. We dismiss as moot the defendant’s
claim as to the denial of his renewed motions for a bill of particulars. With
respect to the defendant’s remaining claims, we affirm the judgment of the
trial court.”)
AC46610 - State v. Rosa (Two counts of sexual assault in the fourth degree; two counts of risk of injury to a child; count of risk of injury to a child; “On appeal, the defendant claims that (1) there was insufficient evidence for the jury to reasonably find that he had contact with the ‘buttock area’ of the victim, T, as alleged in the information with respect to one count of sexual assault in the fourth degree and one count of risk of injury to a child under § 53-21 (a) (2); (2) the trial court improperly admitted portions of T’s video-recorded forensic interview under the medical diagnosis and treatment exception to the rule against hearsay; and (3) the trial court improperly limited the disclosure of certain of T’s confidential medical and mental health records following an in camera review of those records. We disagree and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the court.”)