State v. Jacob
In State v. Jacob, 69 Conn. App. 666, 798 A.2d 974 (2002) it was an acquittee who had filed an application seeking early discharge from the custody and jurisdiction of the board. Id., 669.
In that case, the acquittee had the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that he was a person who should be discharged. See General Statutes 17a-593 (f).
The Court said, "The determination as to whether an acquittee is currently mentally ill to the extent that he would pose a danger to himself or the community if discharged is a question of fact and, therefore, our review of this finding is governed by the clearly erroneous standard. See State v. Warren, 169 Conn. 207, 211-12, 363 A.2d 91 (1975). A finding is clearly erroneous when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. In applying the clearly erroneous standard to the findings of a trial court, we keep constantly in mind that our function is not to decide factual issues de novo. Our authority . . . is circumscribed by the deference we must give to decisions of the trier of fact, who is usually in a superior position to appraise and weigh the evidence." Id., 680.