State of Connecticut v. Casey Sinclair

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s narcotics conviction, concluding that hearsay concerning the vehicle’s inspection location was nontestimonial and that its admission, although evidentiary error, did not substantially affect the verdict. The court also held that three improper prosecutorial comments during closing argument did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial because they were brief, relatively minor, and unlikely to have changed the verdict in light of the strong evidence of guilt.