Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ******************************************************

STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. EARL JACOBS (SC 16835)
Sullivan, C. J., and Borden, Katz, Vertefeuille and Zarella, Js. Argued May 20--officially released August 12, 2003

Harry Weller, senior assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, were Jonathan C. Benedict, state's attorney, and Roslyn Fleisher, senior assistant state's attorney, for the appellant (state). Annacarina DelMastro, assistant public defender, for the appellee (defendant).
Opinion

PER CURIAM. This certified appeal involves the proper standard to be applied by the trial court in authorizing the involuntary medication of an incompetent criminal defendant to render him competent to stand trial. The state appeals from the Appellate Court's affirmance of the trial court's order involuntarily to medicate the defendant, Earl Jacobs, who is incompe-

tent. The state challenges the Appellate Court's conclusion that the defendant's first and sixth amendment rights were implicated by the trial court's order. We vacate the judgment of the Appellate Court. The record reveals the following procedural history. The defendant was charged with simple trespass in violation of General Statutes

Download 265cr131.pdf

Connecticut Law