State v. Costello

Citation62 Conn. 128,25 A. 477
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
Decision Date30 June 1892
PartiesSTATE v. COSTELLO.

Appeal from superior court, Tolland county; Fenn, Judge.

James Costello, having been convicted of willfully injuring a house of worship, moved in arrest of judgment, which was denied. He therefore appeals. Judgment reversed.

W. C. Vase and T. D. Waterous, for appellant.

B. H. Bill, State's Atty., for the State.

ANDREWS, C. J. The defendant was bound over to the superior court in Tolland county by a justice of the peace in the town of Mansfield, upon a grand juror's complaint, charging "that at said town of Mansfield, on the 28th day of January, A. D. 1891. James Costello, of said Mansfield, with force and arms, did willfully injure a public building and house of worship situated in said town of Mansfield, said building being the property of the Second Congregational Society of said Mansfield, and used by said society as a house of worship, against the peace, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and of evil example." In the superior court he was tried upon the same complaint, and found guilty. He thereupon moved in arrest of judgment, "because the said complaint and the matters therein contained are insufficient in the law to warrant a judgment thereon to be rendered against him." The superior court overruled that motion. The defendant now appeals to this court, and assigns as a reason for appeal "that the court erred in overruling his said motion in arrest of judgment." The statute upon which the complaint was brought is section 1423 of the General Statutes of 1888, and is that "every person who shall willfully injure any public building, house of worship, college, or schoolhouse, or who shall willfully injure or carry away any stovepipe or furniture in or belonging to any such building, shall be fined," etc.

It is a general rule of criminal pleading, from which no substantial departure is ever permitted, that every information or indictment must contain a statement of all the facts and circumstances essential to constitute the crime, with such particularity and certainty that the defendant may know the nature of the crime of which he is accused, and what he is to answer; that the jury may be warranted in their conclusion of guilty or not guilty upon the premises delivered to them; that the court may see a definite offense on the record, to which they may apply the judgment and punishment prescribed bylaw; and that the conviction or acquittal of the defendant may be pleaded in bar to a subsequent prosecution for the same offense. Rex v. Home, Cowp. 672, 782; 2 Swift, Dig. 396. It has been stated in many cases that in an information for a statutory offense it is sufficient to allege it...

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 cases
  • State v. Smith
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • February 7, 1914
    ...... to prepare for it." (State v. McFadden, 48. Wash. 259, 93 P. 414, 14 L. R. A., N. S., 1140; People v. Olmstead, 30 Mich. 431; Titus v. State, 49. N.J.L. 36, 7 A. 621, 7 Am. Cr. Rep. 254; State v. Lowe, 66 Minn. 296, 68 N.W. 1094; State v. Costello, 62 Conn. 128, 25 A. 477, cited in 11 Am. Cr. Rep. 517; Fletcher v. State, 2 Okla. Cr. 300, 101 P. 599, 23 L. R. A., N. S., 581; Ehrlick v. Commonwealth, 125 Ky. 742, 128 Am. St. 269, 102 S.W. 289, 10 L. R. A., N. S., 995; Armour Packing Co. v. United States, 153 F. 1, 82 C. C. A. 135, 14 L. ......
  • State v. Coleman
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • October 22, 1974
    ...v. Couture, 151 Conn. 213, 215-216, 196 A.2d 113; State v. McGee, supra; State v. Keena, 63 Conn. 329, 330, 28 A. 522; State v. Costello, 62 Conn. 128, 130, 25 A. 477; Russell v. United States, 369 U.S. 749, 763, 82 S.Ct. 1038, 8 L.Ed.2d 240; United States v. Debrow, 346 U.S. 374, 376, 74 S......
  • Reynolds v. Comm'r of Corr.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • June 28, 2016
    ...decisions in State v. Tyrrell, 100 Conn. 101, 122 A. 924 (1923), State v. Keena, 63 Conn. 329, 28 A. 522 (1893), and State v. Costello, 62 Conn. 128, 25 A. 477 (1892). These cases do not, however, discuss whether the alleged defects in the information rendered the trial court without subjec......
  • Reynolds v. Comm'r of Corr., SC 19071
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • June 28, 2016
    ...decisions in State v. Tyrrell, 100 Conn. 101, 122 A. 924 (1923), State v. Keena, 63 Conn. 329, 28 A. 522 (1893), and State v. Costello, 62 Conn. 128, 25 A. 477 (1892). These cases do not, however, discuss whether the alleged defects in the information rendered the trial court without subjec......
  • 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