[DOWNLOAD] "State v. Ledbetter" by The Supreme Court of the State of Connecticut " Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: State v. Ledbetter
- Author : The Supreme Court of the State of Connecticut
- Release Date : January 01, 2003
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 65 KB
Description
Argued October 23, 2002 Opinion A jury found the defendant, Robin Ledbetter, guilty of felony murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54c, 1 conspiracy to commit robbery in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a134 (a) (3) 2 and 53a-48 (a), 3 and attempt to commit robbery in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-49 (a) (2) 4 and 53a-134 (a) (3). The trial court rendered judgment in accordance with the jury verdict, 5 from which the defendant appealed to this court pursuant to General Statutes § 51-199 (b) (3). 6 On appeal, the defendant, who was fourteen years old at the time of the commission of the offenses, raises two claims, both of which relate to a confession that she had given to the police. First, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly failed to suppress her confession because it was obtained in the absence of a parent or guardian in violation of General Statutes § 46b-137 (a), 7 which provides, inter alia, that no confession made by a child 8 to a police officer shall be admissible ""in any proceeding concerning the alleged delinquency of th[at] child"" unless the confession was made in the presence of the child's parent or guardian. Second, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly instructed the jury regarding its role in evaluating the reliability of her confession. With respect to the defendant's first claim, we conclude that, although the facts support the trial court's conclusion that the defendant's confession was obtained in compliance with § 46b-137 (a), that statute is inapplicable to the present case inasmuch as its provisions pertain only to proceedings in juvenile court and not to proceedings in adult criminal court. 9 With respect to the defendant's second claim, we conclude that the trial court's instructions were proper. We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. The jury reasonably could have found the following facts. On the evening of February 23, 1996, the defendant, Philip Milling, Danixa Sanchez and Sanchez' boyfriend, Lucis Richardson, were socializing together in an apartment located at 84-86 Martin Street (apartment) in Hartford. At some point that evening, Richardson asked the defendant ""[i]f it was still on."" Sanchez asked Richardson what he meant, but Richardson told Sanchez to mind her own business. Thereafter, the defendant explained to Sanchez that Richardson was referring to a plan to rob a taxi driver.