Connecticut Courts: State v. Khan Officially Released Date & Legal Deadlines

• The "officially released" date is prominently displayed at the beginning of Connecticut judicial opinions.
• This date signifies when an opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal and released as a slip opinion.
• It serves as the operative date for calculating all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification.
• All judicial opinions remain subject to both modification and technical correction after their initial release.

This date is established as the operative starting point for all time periods relevant to the filing of postopinion motions.

The "officially released" date holds a pivotal position within the Connecticut legal landscape, serving as a critical timestamp for judicial pronouncements. This specific date is consistently positioned near the beginning of every opinion, ensuring its immediate visibility and importance to anyone reviewing the document. Its primary function is to delineate the precise moment a court's decision enters the public record through formal publication channels. Specifically, this date signifies when the opinion is scheduled for inclusion in the Connecticut Law Journal, the official repository for judicial decisions within the state. Concurrently, it also marks the point at which the opinion becomes available as a "slip opinion," an initial, often preliminary, version distributed to the legal community. This dual publication mechanism underscores the date's fundamental role in ensuring the timely and accessible dissemination of judicial rulings to legal practitioners, scholars, and the public, establishing a clear reference point for the commencement of their legal effect.

Beyond its role in publicizing judicial decisions, the "officially released" date carries immense procedural significance, acting as the definitive trigger for a range of subsequent legal actions. This date is established as the operative starting point for all time periods relevant to the filing of postopinion motions. These motions are essential tools for litigants seeking to challenge, clarify, or otherwise address aspects of a court's ruling after its initial issuance. The precise calculation of deadlines for such motions is entirely dependent on this "officially released" date, making its accurate identification paramount for legal strategy and compliance. Furthermore, the same operative date governs the commencement of timeframes for submitting petitions for certification. Petitions for certification are formal requests to a higher court to review a lower court's decision, often a crucial step in the appellate process. The strict adherence to these time limits, all anchored to the "officially released" date, is non-negotiable for preserving a party's right to further judicial review and ensuring the orderly progression of legal proceedings within the Connecticut court system.

An important aspect of Connecticut judicial opinions, even after their "officially released" date, is their inherent susceptibility to change. All opinions, without exception, are subject to modification. This provision acknowledges that judicial decisions, while carefully considered, may require substantive alterations post-release. Such modifications could arise from various factors, including further review by the issuing court or the identification of errors that impact the legal reasoning or outcome. In addition to broader modifications, opinions are also subject to technical correction. These corrections typically address non-substantive issues such as typographical errors, grammatical mistakes, or minor factual inaccuracies that do not alter the core legal holding. The allowance for both modification and technical correction means that the version of an opinion initially released on its "officially released" date may not represent its final, definitive form. This dynamic characteristic necessitates that legal professionals exercise diligence, recognizing that while the "officially released" date initiates critical deadlines, the content of the opinion itself may evolve, requiring ongoing attention to ensure reliance on the most current and accurate version.

Source: Based on official Connecticut court documentation