State v. Butkiewicz

Connecticut Superior Court

State v. Butkiewicz

190 A.2d 232, 24 Conn. Super. Ct. 307, 24 Conn. Supp. 307, 1963 Conn. Super. LEXIS 134

DecidedFebruary 28, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 190 A.2d 232 (State v. Butkiewicz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Butkiewicz, 190 A.2d 232, 24 Conn. Super. Ct. 307, 24 Conn. Supp. 307, 1963 Conn. Super. LEXIS 134 (Colo. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Division.

The defendant, age thirty-nine,

pleaded guilty to violation of the Uniform State Narcotic Drug Act and was sentenced to a term of not less than two nor more than five years in state prison. The maximum penalty for this offense is imprisonment for not more than five years. General Statutes § 19-265a.

On July 12,1962, the defendant was observed purchasing cheracol, an exempt narcotic. Upon inter *308 rogation, defendant admitted using fictitious names on several occasions to obtain narcotics. He also admitted being addicted to narcotics for a period of three years.

Counsel for the defendant pleaded that the defendant be sent to a hospital for a proper workup to see if there may be other problems than that of addiction to drugs. It appears from the presentence report that the defendant, besides being addicted to drugs, is an alcoholic. It is noteworthy that the defendant continued to make purchases of this medicine even after Ms arrest on the present charge. The defendant’s history reveals that Ms use of narcotics dates back at least two years. He has sought help at veterans’ hospitals on at least a dozen different occasions, over the years, for alcoholism; but he has never stayed long enough to let the medical authorities help him. The claim that he may have a better chance to help himself by a reduction in his minimum sentence or confinement in a hospital cannot be substantiated by Ms previous behavior.

The sentence is proper and should stand.

Healey, Bogdanski and Loiselle, Js., participated in this decision.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By the Division.

The defendant, age thirty-nine,

pleaded guilty to violation of the Uniform State Narcotic Drug Act and was sentenced to a term of not less than two nor more than five years in state prison. The maximum penalty for this offense is imprisonment for not more than five years. General Statutes § 19-265a.

On July 12,1962, the defendant was observed purchasing cheracol, an exempt narcotic. Upon inter *308 rogation, defendant admitted using fictitious names on several occasions to obtain narcotics. He also admitted being addicted to narcotics for a period of three years.

Counsel for the defendant pleaded that the defendant be sent to a hospital for a proper workup to see if there may be other problems than that of addiction to drugs. It appears from the presentence report that the defendant, besides being addicted to drugs, is an alcoholic. It is noteworthy that the defendant continued to make purchases of this medicine even after Ms arrest on the present charge. The defendant’s history reveals that Ms use of narcotics dates back at least two years. He has sought help at veterans’ hospitals on at least a dozen different occasions, over the years, for alcoholism; but he has never stayed long enough to let the medical authorities help him. The claim that he may have a better chance to help himself by a reduction in his minimum sentence or confinement in a hospital cannot be substantiated by Ms previous behavior.

The sentence is proper and should stand.

Healey, Bogdanski and Loiselle, Js., participated in this decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

190 A.2d 232, 24 Conn. Super. Ct. 307, 24 Conn. Supp. 307, 1963 Conn. Super. LEXIS 134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-butkiewicz-connsuperct-1963.