State v. Holley

Timothy F. Costello, assistant state's attorney, in support of the petition.

Raymond L. Durelli, assigned counsel, in opposition.

Opinion

The petition by the state of Connecticut for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 160 Conn.App. 578, 127 A.3d 221 (2015), is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that the defendant's convictions should be reversed on the basis of his claim that the trial court violated his right to present a defense by preventing him from presenting evidence regarding a bite mark on his cohort's hand?

“2. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that testimony regarding a witness' observation of a bite mark on the defendant's cohort's hand violated the limitation on lay opinion testimony in Connecticut Code of Evidence § 7–1?

“3. Did the Appellate Court correctly determine that an item visible in the defendant's backpack in a surveillance video was a shoebox violated the limitation on lay opinion testimony in Connecticut Code of Evidence § 7–1?

“4. If the answer to questions two and/or three is in the affirmative, was any error harmless?”