General
State of Connecticut v. Miguel Martinez
21 Conn. App. 813·Connecticut Appellate Court·1990·CT
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
State of Connecticut v. Miguel Martinez
(7894)
Spallone, O’Connell and Norcott, Js.
Argued March 9
decision released March 20, 1990
Lauren Weisfeld, assistant public defender, with whom, on the brief, were G. Douglas Nash, public defender, and Meira Rosenberg, assistant public defender, for the appellant (defendant).
Mary H. Lesser, deputy assistant state’s attorney, with whom, on the brief, were John T. Redway, state’s attorney, and Bernadette Conway, assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The defendant claims, as error, and the state concedes, that nothing in the record indicates that the trial court informed the defendant of his fundamental right to a jury trial or elicited from him a waiver of that right.
There is error, the judgment of conviction is set aside and the case is remanded for a new trial.