State v. Banet

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
Writing for the CourtBefore BROWN; BALDWIN
Citation140 Conn. 118,98 A.2d 530
PartiesSTATE v. BANET. Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut
Decision Date30 June 1953

Page 530

98 A.2d 530
140 Conn. 118
STATE

v.
BANET.
Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.
June 30, 1953.

[140 Conn. 119] David R. Lessler, Bridgeport, for appellant (defendant).

James J. O'Connell, Pros. Atty., Bridgeport, for appellee (state).

Before [140 Conn. 118] BROWN, C. J., and BALDWIN, INGLIS, O'SULLIVAN and CORNELL, JJ. *

[140 Conn. 119] BALDWIN, Associate Justice.

The defendant was charged with the crime of larceny under § 8401 of the General Statutes. He was tried to the court and found guilty. The question on his appeal is whether the evidence established his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

[140 Conn. 120] The trial court could reasonably have found the following facts: The defendant was a dealer in used automobiles, doing business as the Fairfield Auto Mart, Inc. On August 15, 1950, he sold and delivered a 1940 DeSoto sedan to Wiley Dukes for $425 upon a conditional sale contract which acknowledged the receipt of $70 cash and provided for payment of the balance in twelve monthly instalments. On October 21, 1950, he sold and delivered a 1937 Hudson-Terraplane coupe to Salvatore Salvaggio for $150 upon a conditional sale

Page 531

contract which acknowledged the receipt of $50 in cash and provided for payment of the balance in six monthly instalments. The defendant was indebted to the Park City Auto Finance Company, hereinafter referred to as the finance company, in the amount of $7800. He had given checks in part payment of this debt which were worthless because there were insufficient funds in the bank upon which they were drawn to pay them. On December 15, 1950, the defendant met with Paul Harold, president of the finance company, in the office of Robert K. Lesser, an attorney. There, in the presence of Lesser, the defendant executed a note for the amount of the debt and, for security, indorsed and assigned to the finance company about twenty-five conditional sales contracts. Among them were the Dukes and Salvaggio contracts hereinbefore referred to. The total of the balances due on the contracts assigned was not more than $7800. Each assignment stated that 'For value received the undersigned [Fairfield Auto Mart, Inc., by B. Banet] hereby assigns the conditional sales contract, hereon, to the Park City Auto Finance Co., Inc. and hereby transfers title to the motor vehicle described therein to said assignee. * * *' The defendant agreed with Harold that Lesser would hold the conditional sales contracts,[140 Conn. 121] collect the money due on them and apply it toward the defendant's indebtedness. Lesser by letter notified Dukes and Salvaggio, among others, to make all future payments to him.

At the time the assignments of the conditional sales contracts were indorsed, the defendant and Harold discussed the execution of a written agreement covering the contracts assigned. Lesser prepared such an agreement, which had annexed to it a list of contracts....

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 practice notes
  • Almeida v. Holder, No. 08-1410-ag.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • December 8, 2009
    ...of the personal property of another" without the consent of the owner and with a specific intent to deprive permanently. State v. Banet, 140 Conn. 118, 122, 98 A.2d 530, 531 7. The conditions are: "(1) The property consists of a motor vehicle, the value of which exceeds ten thousand dollars......
  • State v. Kurvin
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • March 30, 1982
    ...in larceny relates to both aspects. The taking must be wrongful, that is, without color of right or excuse for the act; State v. Banet, 140 Conn. 118, 122, 98 A.2d 530 (1953); and without the knowing consent of the owner. State v. Marra, 174 Conn. 338, 342, 387 A.2d 550 (1978). The requisit......
  • In re Michaela Lee R., (SC 16122)
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • July 11, 2000
    ..."[C]ourts of probate do not have any general equity jurisdiction." Hall v. Pierson, supra, 63 Conn. 344; see Killen v. Klebanoff, supra, 140 Conn. 118. Similar to implied powers, probate courts possess only those equitable powers as are necessary for the performance of their statutory dutie......
  • State v. Vars
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • November 29, 1966
    ...309; 2 Wharton, Criminal Law (12th Ed.) § 1097; 1 Bishop, Criminal Law (9th Ed.) § 566; 32 Am.Jur. 883 (Larceny, § 2).' State v. Banet, 140 Conn. 118, 122, 98 A.2d 530, Each count of the information charged that the defendant stole a sum of money from the savings account of Joanna Rockwell.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
15 cases
  • Almeida v. Holder, No. 08-1410-ag.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • December 8, 2009
    ...of the personal property of another" without the consent of the owner and with a specific intent to deprive permanently. State v. Banet, 140 Conn. 118, 122, 98 A.2d 530, 531 7. The conditions are: "(1) The property consists of a motor vehicle, the value of which exceeds ten thousand dollars......
  • State v. Kurvin
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • March 30, 1982
    ...in larceny relates to both aspects. The taking must be wrongful, that is, without color of right or excuse for the act; State v. Banet, 140 Conn. 118, 122, 98 A.2d 530 (1953); and without the knowing consent of the owner. State v. Marra, 174 Conn. 338, 342, 387 A.2d 550 (1978). The requisit......
  • In re Michaela Lee R., (SC 16122)
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • July 11, 2000
    ..."[C]ourts of probate do not have any general equity jurisdiction." Hall v. Pierson, supra, 63 Conn. 344; see Killen v. Klebanoff, supra, 140 Conn. 118. Similar to implied powers, probate courts possess only those equitable powers as are necessary for the performance of their statutory dutie......
  • State v. Vars
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • November 29, 1966
    ...309; 2 Wharton, Criminal Law (12th Ed.) § 1097; 1 Bishop, Criminal Law (9th Ed.) § 566; 32 Am.Jur. 883 (Larceny, § 2).' State v. Banet, 140 Conn. 118, 122, 98 A.2d 530, Each count of the information charged that the defendant stole a sum of money from the savings account of Joanna Rockwell.......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT