State v. Kalil
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of burglary in the third degree and larceny in the second degree. The Appellate Court affirmed the judgment of conviction. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the Appellate Court did not err in concluding that (1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting the state to introduce evidence of Defendant’s uncharged misconduct to prove his intent to commit the charged crimes; and (2) Public Acts 2009, No. 09-138, 2, which amended the second degree larceny statute to increase the value of property stolen necessary to constitute the offense, does not apply retroactively.
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.