Opinion

State v. Mebane

  • 204 Conn. 585
  • 529 A.2d 680
  • 1987 Conn. LEXIS 943
Court
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Filed
Aug 4, 1987
Status
Published
Author
Callahan
On the bench
Callahan, Healey, Shea
Cited by
19 cases

rever- sal required when defendant was prevented from speaking with counsel during recess in midst of state’s cross-examination

How later courts described this case

  • rever- sal required when defendant was prevented from speaking with counsel during recess in midst of state’s cross-examination
  • denial of access to counsel during 21-minute recess while defendant on stand per se error

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Callahan, J.,

dissenting. I agree with the majority that the interference with the defendant’s right to *609 counsel was error. I also agree with Justice Shea’s concurring opinion that every such error does not require reversal. In some instances the infringement on the sixth amendment is so minimal as to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. This is one of those instances. I would affirm the opinion of the Appellate Court.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.