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. JOSEPH J. SANKO, JR. (AC 18787)
Mihalakos, Pellegrino and Peters, Js. Argued October 24, 2000--officially released February 27, 2001 Counsel

Donald D. Dakers, special public defender, for the appellant (defendant). Denise B. Smoker, assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, were Kevin T. Kane, state's attorney, and Stephen M. Carney, assistant state's attorney, for the appellee (state).
Opinion

PETERS, J. The principal issue in this appeal is whether, under the circumstances of this case, the trial court properly decided, without a jury trial, that the defendant was subject to an enhanced criminal penalty pursuant to General Statutes (Rev. to 1997)

Download State v. Sanko.pdf

Connecticut Law