278 A.2d 152 (Conn.Cir.Ct. 1971), State v. Anonymous (1971-12)

Citation:278 A.2d 152, 6 Conn.Cir.Ct. 535
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM
Party Name:STATE of Connecticut v. ANONYMOUS (1971-12) [*].
Court:Circuit Court of Connecticut

Page 152

278 A.2d 152 (Conn.Cir.Ct. 1971)

6 Conn.Cir.Ct. 535

STATE of Connecticut


ANONYMOUS (1971-12) [*].

Circuit Court of Connecticut.


Page 153


The record in this case consists solely of two certified transcripts of the proceedings on the motion to reduce the bond fixed by the court, together with the petition. From this record it appears that a complaint is presently pending in the Circuit Court containing five counts as follows: illegal possession of heroin (General Statutes § 19-481(a)); illegal possession of heroin with intent to sell (§ 19-480(a); illegal possession of marihuana (§ 19-481(b); conspiracy to violate the narcotics[6 Conn.Cir.Ct. 536] laws (§ 54-197); destruction of property (§ 54-33e). Bond was fixed in the amount of $75,000. The defendant's motion to reduce the amount was denied.

The defendant has appealed under § 54-63g, which provides: 'Any accused person or the state, aggrieved by an order of the circuit court concerning release, may petition the appellate division of the circuit court for review of such order. * * * Any such petition shall have precedence over any other matter Before said appellate division * * * and the hearing shall be held on one-day notice to the parties concerned.'

It appears that the defendant was recently convicted in the United States District Court for narcotics violations and sentenced to eight years' imprisonment, from which conviction he appealed, posting a bond in the amount of $25,000 pending the appeal. If further appears that the offenses here alleged were committed after his conviction in the District Court and during the pendency of his appeal. Since 1960 the defendant, according to his counsel, has resided in one city, and during this period he has been gainfully employed. He is married, has five children and lives with his wife. It is obvious from the record that the trial court was influenced by the fact that the defendant, while released on bond...

To continue reading