In a case where the “co-conspirator exception” to the hearsay rule played a prominent role, a divided Connecticut Supreme Court ruled 4-3 against a new trial for a defendant sentenced to 55 years in prison for murdering a fellow gang member.

The three dissenting justices wrote in Connecticut v. Ayala that the majority had it wrong. They found the trial court had improperly admitted testimony—under the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule—implicating defendant Vincent Ayala in the murder of Thomas Mozell Jr.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]