*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the advance release version of an opinion and the latest version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publica- tions, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. *********************************************** IN RE POLICE CASE NUMBERS: MERIDEN PD 20-003903, 20-005055 AND BERLIN PD 2020-11662 (AC 44472) Bright, C. J., and Alvord and Clark, Js. Syllabus An individual, L, sought to quash a search and seizure warrant in connection with a police matter in Meriden. The trial court dismissed L’s motions on the ground that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because there was no pending criminal action against L, and L appealed to this court. Subsequently, L was arrested via an arrest warrant with the same police case number as was on the search and seizure warrant. Because L was charged with a class A felony, the matter was transferred from the part B docket in Meriden to the part A docket in New Haven. On L’s appeal, held: the appeal was dismissed as moot as the relief sought on appeal, a hearing on the merits of the motions, is available to L in the pending criminal action, which stemmed from the same investigation that prompted the search warrant at issue in the appeal; moreover, no practi- cal relief would follow from a determination as to the trial court’s jurisdiction to consider those claims in the absence of a pending criminal action; furthermore, although L claimed that the appeal involved the Meriden court that issued the search warrant and not the New Haven court where the criminal action is pending, the search warrant L sought to quash and the arrest warrant in the criminal action both have the same Meriden police case number and were issued in connection with the same investigation. Argued May 18—officially released September 6, 2022 Procedural History Motions to quash a search and seizure warrant, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of New Haven at Meriden, geographical area number seven, where the court, Rosen, J., dismissed the motions, and the movant appealed to this court. Appeal dismissed. Anthony …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals