Francis T. Mandanici, an assistant public defender in New Haven, Conn., is not a person who takes no for an answer. He’s defending the parole violation case of State v. Christopher Dumas, and argued to the Appellate Court that his client was deprived of evenhanded rulings. The trial judge refused to order an eye exam of the victim and key witness, New Haven legal aid lawyer Sheldon Taubman, yet gave the state permission to fingerprint Dumas.

Since both rulings dealt with the issue of identifying the defendant, Mandanici argued that the principle of “evenhanded application” of justice was violated. That argument and five others were rejected by the Appellate Court, which ruled that Mandanici failed to brief the issue and thereby abandoned it.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]