State v. Protopapas
| Decision Date | 18 June 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. CR,CR |
| Citation | 23 Conn.Supp. 471,184 A.2d 558 |
| Court | Circuit Court of Connecticut. Connecticut Circuit Court, Appellate Division |
| Parties | , 23 Conn.Supp. 471 STATE of Connecticut v. Maria PROTOPAPAS. 14-2950. |
Richard M. Cosgrove, Special Public Defender, Hartford, for appellant (defendant).
Edward F. Pasiecznik, Asst. Prosecuting Atty., for appellee (State).
In a trial to the jury the defendant was convicted of breach of the peace. The defendant made numerous telephone calls to the complainant, his brother, his secretary and business associates. Her language was abusive and indecent, and also included threats of violence and personal harm to her listeners and their families, with intent to frighten them.
The defendant's sole assignment of error is that the court erred in charging the jury by failing to define 'peace,' as used in the statute, as 'public peace,' and 'breach of the peace' as 'breach of the public peace.' The defendant duly excepted to the charge, and the exception was noted. There was no written request to charge.
The applicable portions of General Statutes § 53-174 were read twice to the jury in the charge, as follows: "Any person who disturbs or breaks the peace by tumultuous and offensive * * * behavior, or by threatening, * * * [or] assaulting * * * another, or disturbs or breaks the peace * * * by * * * mocking any person, with abusive or indecent language, * * * or, with [the] intent to frighten any person, threatens to commit any crime against him,' * * * shall be punished.' The statute does not use the word 'public' with reference to the words 'peace' or 'breach of peace.' The court charged: The court then defined the other words and terms in the statute. A charge must be read and considered in its entirety. Salvatore v. Hayden, 144 Conn. 437, 442, 133...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Boyer, s. CR
...telephone calls of a threatening, abusive and violent nature were a breach of the peace proscribed by the statute. State v. Protopapas, 23 Conn.Sup. 471, 184 A.2d 558. In that case, however, the sole error assigned was the claimed failure of the presiding judge to define to the jury the wor......
-
City of Seattle v. Alexander, 41088
...it is apparent from Pavish v. Meyers, Supra, that the offense does not require an actual public disturbance. Also see, Connecticut v. Protopapas, 23 Conn.Sup. ,471, 1 Conn.Cir. 319, 184 A.2d 558 (1962), and City of South Euclid v. Novy, 7 Ohio Misc. 181, 36 Ohio Op.2d 228, 214 N.E.2d 711 Pu......
-
City of South Euclid v. Novy
...the Sterkel family were simultaneously present when a number of the episodes described at the trial occurred. In State v. Protopapas, 23 Conn. Sup. 471, 184 A.2d 558 (1962), an Appellate of the State of Connecticut stated as 'It is not the law that there is no breach of the peace unless the......
-
State v. Protopapas
...The petition by the defendant for certification for appeal from the Appellate Division of the Circuit Court is denied. 23 Conn.Sup. 471, 184 A.2d 558. ...