Case ID: conn-app_33/html/0918-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

State of Connecticut v. Gilbert Johnson
    (12041)
    Foti, Freedman and Schaller, Js.
    Argued November 30
    decision released December 21, 1993
    
      Deborah Del Prete Sullivan, assistant public defender, for the appellant (defendant).
    
      Carolyn K. Longstreth, assistant state’s attorney, with whom were James Dinnan, assistant state’s attorney, and, on the brief, Michael Dearington, state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).
   Per Curiam.

The defendant appeals from the trial court’s judgment revoking his probation and committing him to the custody of the commissioner of correction to serve the suspended portion of his sentence. The dispositive issue in this case is whether the trial court applied the proper standard of proof. While the trial court used phrases such as “reliable and probative,” “abundantly clear,” and “sufficient cause,” the only standard stated was “whether there is probable cause to believe he committed the violation of threatening.” (Emphasis added.)

This matter is controlled by State v. Davis, 29 Conn. App. 801, 618 A.2d 557, cert. granted, 225 Conn. 918, 623 A.2d 1024 (1993).

The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial.