State v. Hanson, No. 10-81
| Docket Nº | No. 10-81 |
| Citation | 446 A.2d 372, 141 Vt. 228 |
| Case Date | April 22, 1982 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Vermont |
Page 372
v.
Kent A. HANSON.
Page 373
[141 Vt. 229] John J. Easton, Jr., Atty. Gen., Edwin L. Hobson, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., and Sienna Walton and Christopher Micciche, Law Clerks, on the brief, Montpelier, for plaintiff.
[141 Vt. 230] Andrew B. Crane, Defender General, William A. Nelson, Appellate Defender, and Ellen Coogan, Law Clerk, on the brief, Montpelier, for defendant.
[141 Vt. 228] Before BARNEY, C. J., BILLINGS, HILL and UNDERWOOD, JJ., and DALEY, J. (Ret.), Specially Assigned.
[141 Vt. 230] BARNEY, Chief Justice.
The hapless defendant and a companion came to rest in a Walden snowbank in the early morning hours of March 13, 1980, after a journey which began in Rutland the night before and took them between times to Burlington, Waterbury, Stowe and Montpelier in a succession of vehicles driven at speeds of up to 110 miles per hour. The defendant was subsequently charged with grand larceny of the car he was apprehended in, and with breaking and entering in the nighttime with intent to commit larceny. After trial by jury he was convicted of both crimes and now appeals that conviction on two grounds: error in the jury instruction and insufficient evidence to convict.
The facts of this case flavor the issues. The defendant and his friend, suspecting that the police were looking for them, fled Rutland in a pick-up truck they had taken without consent. They headed for Waterbury, where the defendant sought to pick up some medication. The truck was low on gas so they stopped at a service station, filled the tank, and left without paying. Still, even with gas, the truck was unsatisfactory. It drove too slowly and had no radio.
The pair stopped at a Chevrolet dealership in Waterbury to get another vehicle. The first car they took after admitting themselves to the garage turned out to have a faulty transmission, and after driving a short distance they returned it. The second car they attempted to take was in excellent condition, but somehow, after starting the engine, they managed to lock both doors with the keys inside and the motor running. Finally a third car was chosen, its keys were located, and license plates were taken from the first car and put in place. The two then headed for Montpelier, the defendant driving the car and his friend following in the truck, which they planned to abandon elsewhere.
This third car too was low on gas, so once again they stopped at a service station, filled up, and left without paying. This time the attendant called the police, who arrived to investigate.
[141 Vt. 231] Meanwhile the defendant and his friend had abandoned the truck on a back road near Montpelier, and, thinking they were in the clear, continued on. As it happened,
Page 374
however, the road circled back toward Montpelier and the unfortunate pair came out near the same service station they had just visited. Seeing the police, the defendant made a U-turn and the chase began, ending abruptly when defendant's car hit a patch of ice, catapulting it into the snowbank.The first question raised on appeal is whether the trial court was obligated to instruct...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tenner v. State, No. 2-86-285-CR
...(citing Beck ). Vermont courts have held a defendant is "entitled" to instructions on lesser-included offenses. State v. Hanson, 141 Vt. 228, 446 A.2d 372, 374 The Court has also noted that denying a defendant instructions on lesser-included offenses would "raise difficult constitutional qu......
-
State v. Roy, No. 87-536
...was expressly written into the statute. See State v. Audette, 149 Vt. 218, 222, 543 A.2d 1315, 1316 (1988) (kidnapping); State v. Hanson, 141 Vt. 228, 232, 446 A.2d 372, 374 (1982) (larceny); State v. Peters, 141 Vt. at 348, 450 A.2d at 336 (assault on a law enforcement officer); State v. G......
-
State v. Stanislaw, No. 88-131
...is composed of an act and an intent, which concur at a point in time." Audette, 149 Vt. at 220, 543 A.2d at 1316 (quoting State v. Hanson, 141 Vt. 228, 232, 446 A.2d 372, 374 (1982) (citations omitted)). We have implied guilty intent as an element when none was expressly written in the stat......
-
State v. Francis, No. 87-458
...the specific [151 Vt. 307] intent to steal, that is, the "intent to take and keep property of another wrongfully." State v. Hanson, 141 Vt. 228, 232, 446 A.2d 372, 374 Defendant was charged with violating 13 V.S.A. § 608(a), which provides: A person who assaults another and robs, steals, or......
-
Tenner v. State, No. 2-86-285-CR
...(citing Beck ). Vermont courts have held a defendant is "entitled" to instructions on lesser-included offenses. State v. Hanson, 141 Vt. 228, 446 A.2d 372, 374 The Court has also noted that denying a defendant instructions on lesser-included offenses would "raise difficult constitutional qu......
-
State v. Roy, No. 87-536
...was expressly written into the statute. See State v. Audette, 149 Vt. 218, 222, 543 A.2d 1315, 1316 (1988) (kidnapping); State v. Hanson, 141 Vt. 228, 232, 446 A.2d 372, 374 (1982) (larceny); State v. Peters, 141 Vt. at 348, 450 A.2d at 336 (assault on a law enforcement officer); State v. G......
-
State v. Stanislaw, No. 88-131
...is composed of an act and an intent, which concur at a point in time." Audette, 149 Vt. at 220, 543 A.2d at 1316 (quoting State v. Hanson, 141 Vt. 228, 232, 446 A.2d 372, 374 (1982) (citations omitted)). We have implied guilty intent as an element when none was expressly written in the stat......
-
State v. Francis, No. 87-458
...the specific [151 Vt. 307] intent to steal, that is, the "intent to take and keep property of another wrongfully." State v. Hanson, 141 Vt. 228, 232, 446 A.2d 372, 374 Defendant was charged with violating 13 V.S.A. § 608(a), which provides: A person who assaults another and robs, steals, or......