State v. Dobkin

• Decision Date: 08 March 1906
• Citation: 63 A. 349,78 Conn. 642
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. DOBKIN.

63 A. 349

78 Conn. 642

STATE

v. DOBKIN.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

March 8, 1906.

Morris Dobkin was convicted of larceny, and applies for an order requiring the clerk of the superior court to show cause why he should not file the request of the accused for a finding of facts, and for a like order to the trial judge requiring him to show cause why he should not make a finding. Application denied.

John O'Neill and Joseph E. Laubler, for appellant. John P. Kellogg, Asst. State's Atty., for the State.

TORRANCE, C. J. The statute upon which the application is brought provides, in substance, that in case a judge shall refuse or neglect to make a finding, properly applied for, in an action tried before him, "the Supreme Court of Errors shall, upon application of any party to said action, * * * order said judge to make and file such finding within such time as said court shall fix." The substance of the application may be stated in this way: On July 3, 1905, in the superior court at Waterbury, the applicant was convicted of the crime of theft; on the 0th day of the same month he filed notice of an appeal from the judgment in said cause; and on the 7th day of October, 1905, he delivered to the clerk of said court a written request for a finding in said cause, together with a draft of said proposed finding, to be filed in said cause as required by law. By order of the judge who presided at the trial of the applicant the clerk refused to file said papers, and the judge has neglected and refused to make any finding. The applicant prayed that an order to show cause might issue against said clerk and said judge, and also a further order requiring the former to file said papers and the latter to make and file a finding.

The statute provides in substance that the request to a judge to make a finding must be filed with the clerk within two weeks after the rendition of the judgment, "unless the decision of the court is filed in the months of July or August." Gen. St. 1902, § 793; Pub. Acts 1905, p. 286, c. 58. The applicant claims that this two weeks' limitation of time for filing a request for a finding does not apply to judgments rendered in July or August, but that as to such judgments such a request may be filed at any time, or at least within any reasonable time, after the judgment. This claim is not tenable. As the filing of a request for a finding is an important step in the process of appeal, and as it is one upon which the time for taking...