To obtain review of an unpreserved claim of constitutional error under the 1989 Connecticut Supreme Court case of State v. Golding, a defendant need only raise that claim in his main brief wherein he must, as stated in the 2009 Appellate Court decision in State v. Wright, "present a record that is [adequate] for review and affirmatively [demonstrate] that his claim is indeed a violation of a fundamental constitutional right;" and, to the extent that the Supreme Court's 2002 decision in State v. Ramos and its progeny requires an affirmative request for Golding review, those cases were overruled.
|June 09, 2014
Thank you for sharing!
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
This premium content is locked for Connecticut Law Tribune subscribers only.
Subscribe now to enjoy unlimited access to Connecticut Law Tribune content,
5 free articles* across the ALM Network every 30 days,
Exclusive access to other free ALM publications
And exclusive discounts on ALM events and publications.
*May exclude premium content Already have an account? Sign In Now
Interested in customizing your subscription with Law.com All Access?
Contact our Sales Professionals at 1-855-808-4530 or send an email to email@example.com to learn more.
As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters.
Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss.
Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.