State v. Ervin, 936 A.2d 290, 105 Conn.App. 34 (Conn.App. 2007)

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.

    • 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 ...

    • 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 ...

    • State v. Deleon, 645 A.2d 518, 230 Conn. 351 (Conn. 1994)

      The state admitted into evidence a videotape of the crime scene, even though the videographer used the zoom lens and stepped over the victims body to show the jury what the defendant would have had to do to get to the safe. “This court has ...

    • State v. Pereira, 72 Conn.App. 545, 571, 805 A.2d 787 (2002)

      ‘‘The mere use of a PowerPoint presentation does not rise to the level of an impropriety.’’ It is ‘‘the legitimate and longstanding purpose of all closing argument’’ to ‘‘comment upon facts properly in evidence and upon reasonable inferences to be ...

    • State v. Hardy, 489 A.2d 508 (Me. 1985)

      The results of experiments are admissible if they are conducted under circumstances which bear a "substantial similarity" to those surrounding the event placed in issue at trial. See Sucrest Corporation v. M/V Jennifer, 455 F.Supp. 371, 385 n. 22 ...