Waiver Of Instructional Claim By Invited Error Or “Active Inducement” (Connecticut)

In State v. Ebron, 292 Conn. 656, 682, 975 A.2d 17 (2009), the Connecticut Supreme Court held that an appellant will not be deemed to have waived a claim of instructional error unless it is shown that he ''actively induced the trial court to give the . . . instruction that he . . . challenges on appeal . . . .'' Ebron explained that a party will have waived an objection to instructional language if he or she has ''actively induce[d] the trial court to act on the challenged portion of the instruction.'' Id., 680. The court defined active inducement in terms of an appellant having supplied or otherwise advocated for the very instructional language at issue in the appeal. Id., 681-82.

For subscription based briefing and sample instructions on this and related issues see:

Forecite National™
295.3.3 - Overcoming Invited Error
Forecite California™
PG VI(A)(2) - Invited Error: General Principles
PG VI(A)(5) - Invited Error: Inapplicable Where Requested Instruction Has Been Changed
PG VI(A)(6) - Invited Error: Error Must Be Caused By Counsel