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.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Jacob, supra, 680; see also United States v. Steil, 916 F.2d 485, 487-88 (8th Cir. 1990) (<HOLDING>); People v. Lang, 189 Ill. App. 3d 384, 390,
holding that clearly erroneous standard applies to review district courts determination of dangerousness under 18 usc  4246 holding that a finding of accommodation is reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review instead of under a de novo standard holding that courts of appeals should review the facts necessary to determine whether an exemption to the flsa applies in a particular under the clearly erroneous standard holding that the finding of intent to discriminate is a factual determination subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review holding that the clearly erroneous standard of review applies to  3bllc determinations