State v. Keena
| Citation | 64 Conn. 212,29 A. 470 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Connecticut |
| Decision Date | 06 March 1894 |
| Parties | STATE v. KEENA. |
Appeal from superior court, New Haven county.
John Keena, convicted of arson, appeals. Affirmed.
For report on former appeal, see 28 Atl. 522
Charles S. Hamilton, for appellant. Tilton E. Doolittle, List. Atty., for the State.
An information charging the defendant with the crime of arson was filed in the superior court by the state a attorney, while the defendant was in the custody of the court to answer to a former information charging the same crime, but with a different allegation of the ownership of the building burned. The defendant was tried, convicted, and sentenced. Upon being put to plead, and at different stages of the trial, he objected in due form to the validity of the information. The appeal assigns error in overruling these objections, and the defendant claims that the judgment should be set aside, mainly because the crime charged is exclusively within the original jurisdiction of the superior court, and in such case the state's attorney has no authority to file an original information. It is also urged as ground of error that, when the information was filed, another information was pending charging in a different form the commission of the same crime, and that the defendant was arraigned and tried, against his protest, without the issue of a bench warrant.
The pendency of one indictment does not prevent another being found in the same court for the same cause; and when the defendant is in custody the attorney may file an information for any offense proper to be tried by the court. Com. v. Drew, 3 Cush. 279; Hendee v. Taylor, 29 Conn. 456. When the defendant is in the custody of the court, there is no need of process to bring him before the court, and he may be arraigned without the issue of such process. 1 Chit. Cr. Law, 338. These propositions are well-settled law in this state. Nor is there any ground for the defendant's principal claim of error. The powers and duties of a state's attorney have never been defined by statute law. They are (except in certain particulars specifically enumerated in the statutes) the necessary incidents of the office by force of the common law of this state. The language used in relation to the office has not materially changed since it was first formally established. In 1704 the "atturney for the queen," is required to "prosecute and implead in the lawe all criminall offenders, and to doe all things necessary or convenient as an atturney to suppress vice and imorallitie." 4 Colonial Records, 468. In 1730 this act was passed: "In each county there shall be one king's attourney, who shall plead and manage, in the county where such attourney is appointed, in all matters proper, in behalf of our sovereign lord the king." 7 Colonial Records, 280. In 1764, apparently to remove any doubt that the representative of the crown also represented the sovereignty of the colony, the king's attorneys in the several counties were empowered "to appear in behalf of the governor and company of this county in all cases concerning them or brought for or against them in any of the said counties." 12 Colonial Records, 258. In 1784 it was enacted that "in each county in this state, there shall be one state attorney, who shall prosecute, manage and plead in the county where such attorney is appointed, in all matters proper for, and in behalf of the state." St 1786, p. 11. In the Revision of 1821 and of 1838 the same language was used. In 1849 the language was condensed as follows: "The county court, in each county, shall appoint one attorney for the state, who shall act as attorney in behalf of the state in the county where appointed." Revision 1849, p. 208. In 1888 the statute reads thus: "A state's attorney in each county, who shall act therein as attorney in behalf of the state." Gen. St. § 763. It has been uniformly held since 1730 that the office then established carried with it the duty to conduct all criminal prosecutions in the superior...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hayes
...... of this state that authorizes the [127 Conn. 581] state's. attorney to file informations in the superior court, both in. ordinary criminal prosecutions and in those prerogative writs. where he represents as attorney general the sovereignty of. the state.’ State v. Keena, 64 Conn. 212, 215,. 29 A. 470, 471; State v. Carroll, 97 Conn. 598, 600,. 117 A. 694. The practice of filing an original information in. the trial courts was in vogue before the adoption of the. constitution of this state. The only provision of our. constitution bearing directly on the ......
-
State v. Nardini
...the determination of standing requires an inquiry into the status and function of the office of state's attorney. In State v. Keena, 64 Conn. 212, 29 A. 470 (1894), we reviewed the powers and duties of the office of state's attorney. We said (pp. 214-15, 29 A. 470): "The powers and duties o......
-
State v. Haskins
...A.2d 199, cert. denied, 414 U.S. 976, 94 S.Ct. 291, 38 L.Ed.2d 219 (1973); derives his authority from the common law. State v. Keena, 64 Conn. 212, 215, 29 A. 470 (1894). "As a representative of the people of the state, he is under a duty not solely to obtain convictions but, more important......
-
State v. Morrill
...attorney ... derives his authority from the common law." State v. Haskins, 188 Conn. 432, 473, 450 A.2d 828 (1982); State v. Keena, 64 Conn. 212, 215, 29 A. 470 (1894). In 1976, the power of the state's attorney was codified in General Statutes § 51-286a, providing that a state's attorney "......
-
The Creation and Evolution of the Office of Connecticut Attorney General
...Sketch of Tilton E. Doolittle, 67 Conn. 595-98 (1896). 9. 54 Conn. 472 (1886). 10. 68 Conn. 311 (1896). 11. 69 Conn. 64 (1897). 12. 64 Conn. 212, 215 (1894). 13. See State v. New Haven & Northampton Co., 43 Conn. 351 (1876); Tyler v. Hamersley, 44 Conn. 393 (1877). 14. Hartford Courant, Feb......
-
The Common Law and Individual Rights in Connecticut Before the Federal Bill of Rights
...officers well into the 19th century. (Hamersley, J., recites the history of the office of State's Attorney after 1730 in State v. Keena, 64 Conn. 212, 214-15 (1894).) 73 GEORGE L. HASKINS, LAW AND AUTHORITY IN EARLY MASSACHUSSETTS 211 (1960); CR, I:513-14. See also Douglas Hay, Property, Au......