State v. Anderson
| Citation | 205 A.2d 488,152 Conn. 196 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Connecticut |
| Decision Date | 02 December 1964 |
| Parties | STATE of Connecticut v. James T. ANDERSON. Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut |
George A. Saden, Bridgeport, Edwin K. Dimes and Henry McDonald, Jr., Westport, with whom, on the brief, was Sturges N. Laros, Bridgeport, for appellant (defendant).
Joseph T. Gormley, Jr., Asst. State's Atty., with whom, on the brief, were Otto J. Saur, State's Atty., and John F. McGowan, Asst. State's Atty., for appellee (state).
Before KING, C. J., and MURPHY, ALCORN, COMLEY, and SHANNON, JJ.
The defendant was arraigned on an information containing three counts. In the first count, he was charged with placing a child under the age of sixteen years in such a situation that his morals were likely to be impaired, and with doing certain acts likely to impair his morals, in violation of § 53-21 of the General Statutes. In the second and third counts, he was charged with indecent assault in violation of § 53-217 of the General Statutes. The first and third counts of the information relate to incidents which happened on or about April 3, 1961. The jury could find that the defendant arrived at the home of Mr. and Mrs. William F. Hoisington in Weston, Connecticut, late in the afternoon while Mrs. Hoisington was away. Their son David, then aged ten years, was upstairs. Hoisington called David downstairs and forced him to drink two glasses of vodka and cocacola. Hoisington ordered David into the master bedroom on the first floor. In about fifteen minutes, Hoisington and the defendant entered the bedroom, locked the door and both of them performed acts of fellatio on David. Then, in his presence, they performed similar acts upon each other. David cried when subjected to their acts. His sister Andrea, who was then eight years of age, had come home after the door was locked, heard David inside the room crying, and also heard the voices of her father and the defendant from inside the room at the same time.
We shall discuss only the assignments of error which have not been abandoned. In one of them, the defendant claims error in the denial of his motions to dismiss the three counts of the information. Since the denial of such a motion is not properly assignable as error, we will not consider it. State v. Smith, 149 Conn. 487, 489, 181 A.2d 446; Maltbie, Conn.App.Proc. § 212. The defendant also claims error in three rulings excluding evidence. These claims are without merit because proper foundation...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Ceballos
...330, 677 A.2d 912 (1996). In State v. James, supra, 211 Conn. 570, this court overruled its earlier decision in State v. Anderson, 152 Conn. 196, 198, 205 A.2d 488 (1964), and concluded that it is not "essential to grant a requested charge that denigrates a child as usually less worthy of b......
-
State v. Ralls
...denial of a motion to dismiss is not properly assignable as error. State v. Dubina, 164 Conn. 95, 101, 318 A.2d 95; State v. Anderson, 152 Conn. 196, 198, 205 A.2d 488. No subsequent motions for a directed verdict or to set aside the verdict were made. Hence, this issue is not properly befo......
-
State v. Pickering
...her flesh and moved his hands back and forth for a short while, hurting her." Id., 605-606, 124 A.2d 519. In State v. Anderson, 152 Conn. 196, 197, 205 A.2d 488 (1964), the defendant performed fellatio on the victim, a ten year old boy, who cried when subjected to this act. In a number of o......
-
State v. James, 13483
...her out-of-court statement concerning the incident, given soon after its occurrence, in weighing her credibility. In State v. Anderson, 152 Conn. 196, 205 A.2d 488 (1964), also a child abuse case, this court found harmful error in the failure of the trial court to grant "in a request to cha......