DeMarkey v. Fratturo, 836 A.2d 1257, 80 Conn.App. 650 (Conn.App. 2003)
The jury was presented with two other diagrams depicting Mann's impressions of the plaintiff's path Before he was struck by the defendant's vehicle. Each of the three diagrams was admitted without objection and indicated that the plaintiff had run directly into the street immediately prior to being struck by the defendant's vehicle.
Related Articles
Annecharico v. Patterson, 688 A.2d 1341, 44 Conn.App. 271 (Conn.App. 1997)
“Because the witness was qualified to render an opinion on the point of impact and the opinion was based on his own observations of the accident scene, it was proper for the trial court to admit Mantho's testimony and the diagram [of the accident ...
T.H. Leland v. D.R. Leonard, 112 A. 198, 95 Vt. 36 (Vt. 1921)
The value of photographs and photographic enlargements of questioned signatures and documents is everywhere recognized. [95 Vt. 38] It is attested by this Court in Rowell v. Fuller's Estate, 59 Vt. 688, 10 A. 853. They must be properly verified, to ...
State v. Ervin, 936 A.2d 290, 105 Conn.App. 34 (Conn.App. 2007)
The state properly admitted into evidence a videotaped demonstration of a chokehold, viewed by the medical examiner, to demonstrate that the defendant had the knowledge and capacity to perform this on his victim.
Marsh v. Washburn, 528 A.2d 382, 11 Conn.App. 447 (Conn.App. 1987)
“The trial court acted properly in admitting the diagram, not as an ‘accident reconstruction diagram,’ but as a field diagram drawn by the officer at the scene depicting his visual observations of the scene along with his inference as to the ...
State v. Francione, ___ A.3d ___, 136 Conn.App. 302 (Conn.App. 2012)
“In this instance there would have been no meaningful distinction between presenting the information contained on the slides orally and displaying it on an overhead projector. The slides were not improper because all of the information adequately was ...