Case Name: STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. KEITH MURRAY
Court: Connecticut Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1998-06-30
Citations: 49 Conn. App. 847
Docket Number: AC 16916
Parties: STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. KEITH MURRAY
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Appellate Reports
Volume: 49
Pages: 847–847

Head Matter:
STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. KEITH MURRAY
(AC 16916)
Schaller, Hennessy and Shea, Js.
Argued June 9
officially released June 30, 1998

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We agree with the trial court that there was no evidence of availability of the missing witness whom the defendant claimed that the state should have produced. See State v. Jones, 46 Conn. App. 640, 656, 700 A.2d 710, cert. denied, 243 Conn. 941, 704 A.2d 797 (1997). The trial court's determination of fact in so finding was not clearly erroneous. On the basis of the record, we cannot say that the trial court's decision not to give an adverse inference instruction was clearly erroneous. State v. Battle, 39 Conn. App. 742, 746, 667 A.2d 1288 (1995), cert. denied, 237 Conn. 922, 676 A.2d 1375, cert. denied, 519 U.S. 955, 117 S. Ct. 373, 136 L. Ed. 2d 263 (1996).
The judgment is affirmed.