Perez 9409motion
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Perez 9409motion as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 429
- Pages: 1
\ ..
In Re Investigatory Grand Jury
p^
> s i p r o t n e Court
No. 2007-04 September 4, 2009 f
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS AND TO HOLD THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF STATE'S ATTORNEY IN CONTEMPT OF AN ORDER OF THE CONNECTICUT SUPREME COURT1
Pursuant to this Court's supervisory power over the administration of justice, the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, Article I, §§ 7, 8, and 20 of the Constitution of the State of Connecticut, and Practice Book § § 66-2, 85-2 and 41-8, Eddie Perez, the Mayor of the City of Hartford and an interested party, hereby submits the following memorandum in support of his Motion that this Court impose sanctions against the State of Connecticut.2 Should the Court determine that dismissal and/or contempt is not warranted in the present case as requested in his September 2 Motion, Mr. Perez alternatively requests that this Court order as a sanction against the State that either of the above-referenced trials not commence until the conclusion of his term as Mayor in January 2012. I.
The State's Misconduct Has Prejudiced The Defendant's Right To A Fair And Speedy Trial To Such A Degree That Dismissal Is The Only Available Remedy The most recent actions of the State amount to egregious examples of prosecutorial
misconduct in two distinct but related respects. First, the State's disclosure of the substance of the sealed grand jury report was a direct violation of the order of the grand
1
Mr. Perez's Motion was filed with this Court on September 2, 2009. On September 3, 2009, the Court granted his motion for extension of time up to and including September 4, 2009, in which to file the present memorandum in support. 2 Mr. Perez also filed a motion to dismiss and for sanctions alleging the same misconduct with the Superior Court in Docket No. H14H-CR09-0628569-S, and intends to file the same or a similar motion in connection with his arrest on September 2, 2009. A hearing was held on September 4, 2009, in which the trial court (Dewey, J.) held that it had no jurisdiction over the Defendant's motion for contempt and denied his motion to dismiss. Without waiving his motion to dismiss, the Defendant requested a continuance to at least February 2010. The State had no objection, and the trial court granted the .
2009
SANTOS & SEELEY, P.C. • ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 51 RUSS STREET • HARTFORD, CT 06106-1566 • (860)249-6548 • FAX (860) 724-5533 • JURIS NO. 07230
In Re Investigatory Grand Jury
p^
> s i p r o t n e Court
No. 2007-04 September 4, 2009 f
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS AND TO HOLD THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF STATE'S ATTORNEY IN CONTEMPT OF AN ORDER OF THE CONNECTICUT SUPREME COURT1
Pursuant to this Court's supervisory power over the administration of justice, the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, Article I, §§ 7, 8, and 20 of the Constitution of the State of Connecticut, and Practice Book § § 66-2, 85-2 and 41-8, Eddie Perez, the Mayor of the City of Hartford and an interested party, hereby submits the following memorandum in support of his Motion that this Court impose sanctions against the State of Connecticut.2 Should the Court determine that dismissal and/or contempt is not warranted in the present case as requested in his September 2 Motion, Mr. Perez alternatively requests that this Court order as a sanction against the State that either of the above-referenced trials not commence until the conclusion of his term as Mayor in January 2012. I.
The State's Misconduct Has Prejudiced The Defendant's Right To A Fair And Speedy Trial To Such A Degree That Dismissal Is The Only Available Remedy The most recent actions of the State amount to egregious examples of prosecutorial
misconduct in two distinct but related respects. First, the State's disclosure of the substance of the sealed grand jury report was a direct violation of the order of the grand
1
Mr. Perez's Motion was filed with this Court on September 2, 2009. On September 3, 2009, the Court granted his motion for extension of time up to and including September 4, 2009, in which to file the present memorandum in support. 2 Mr. Perez also filed a motion to dismiss and for sanctions alleging the same misconduct with the Superior Court in Docket No. H14H-CR09-0628569-S, and intends to file the same or a similar motion in connection with his arrest on September 2, 2009. A hearing was held on September 4, 2009, in which the trial court (Dewey, J.) held that it had no jurisdiction over the Defendant's motion for contempt and denied his motion to dismiss. Without waiving his motion to dismiss, the Defendant requested a continuance to at least February 2010. The State had no objection, and the trial court granted the .
2009
SANTOS & SEELEY, P.C. • ATTORNEYS AT LAW • 51 RUSS STREET • HARTFORD, CT 06106-1566 • (860)249-6548 • FAX (860) 724-5533 • JURIS NO. 07230
Related Documents
Perez 9409motion
June 2020 11
Perez
December 2019 37
Perez
December 2019 30
Alba Lorena Perez Perez
May 2020 32
Alba Perez Perez
May 2020 17