State v. Lopez
Annotate this Case
The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the trial court determining that Defendant had engaged in criminal conduct while he was on probation by possessing a firearm that was capable of discharging a shot and thus revoking Defendant's probation, holding that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the airlift pellet gun found in Defendant's residence was a firearm as defined by Conn. Gen. Stat. 53a-3(19).
At issue was whether the State presented sufficient evidence at the violation of probation hearing in this case to establish that the airlift pellet gun found in Defendant's residence fell under the definition of a firearm. The Supreme Court concluded that it did not, holding that the trial court's factual finding that the airlift pellet gun was a "weapon" capable of firing a shot for the purpose of the definition of "firearm" under section 53a-3(19) was clearly erroneous.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.