State v. Joseph
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Information for larceny, brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County and tried to the jury before Haines, J.; verdict and judgment of guilty, and appeal by the accused.
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, C. J.
The accused was tried for and convicted of the crime of larceny. No evidence was offered in his behalf in disproof of this charge. His sole defense was that at the time of its commission he was mentally irresponsible.
Three grounds of appeal are pressed. First. “Since the State never put on any evidence that the defendant was sane (and the presumption of sanity was wiped out by the introduction of insanity on the part of the defendant) the verdict should have been directed for the defendant.” Three reasons, each one sufficient, may be suggested which show that this ground is not well taken.
а.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. MainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1897
- State v. LeeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1897
- State v. FettererSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
3Cited by20 opinions
- State v. JoynerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- State v. HafnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- State v. FerroneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
- State v. HolmquistSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- Ferino v. PalmerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1947
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.