DAILY BEAST: …His case was initially struck down by an appellate court, which ruled that the law pertained more to “legalization” than “decriminalization.” But when [Nicholas] Manditto brought the case to the state’s supreme court, they disagreed. With a vote of 7-0, they gave Manditto the go ahead to clear his record.
In a seven-page ruling by Justice Carmen Espinosa, she parses out the difference between the words “decriminalization” and “legalization”—which may provide a roadmap for similar cases in the future. Citing definitions from Merriam Webster and the Oxford English Dictionary, Espinosa rules that CT’s downgrade of marijuana possession in 2011 does in fact qualify as “decriminalization.”
Connecticut law, like other states, includes a provision that expressly defends the right of an individual to file a petition for expunction of a crime if it is later decriminalized. This provision made it easier for Manditto and his attorney to defend his constitutional right to have the convictions overturned, in turn, allowing the court to rule that he was entitled to this move… (more)
