Supreme Court of Connecticut
State of Connecticut v. Daniel B.
March 5, 2019331 Conn. 1
Summary
This dissent argues that the defendant's conversations with two prospective hitmen constituted criminal solicitation and preliminary planning, but not a substantial step toward attempted murder. It maintains that the evidence failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt any substantial act strongly corroborative of criminal intent, particularly because the defendant did not pay money, conduct surveillance, furnish a weapon, or otherwise implement the plan. Ecker, J., dissenting, would have reversed the Appellate Court's judgment.