Home/Supreme Court of Connecticut/State v. Garvey

State v. Garvey

42 Conn. 232
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedApril 15, 1875
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 42 Conn. 232 (State v. Garvey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Garvey, 42 Conn. 232 (Colo. 1875).

Opinion

Phelps, J.

The prisoner was informed against before the Superior Court for New Haven County at the July term, 1874, for an alleged larceny, and a trial on that information, under [233]*233the plea of not guilty, was so far proceeded with that the jury were impanelled and testimony introduced in behalf of the State, when the Attorney, without further prosecution, or attempt at conviction, discontinued the case against the prisoner. At the following October term of the same court the prisoner was again informed against and placed on trial for the same larceny. He pleaded in bar the former information and the proceedings under it, and claimed that he was entitled to be discharged on the ground that within the meaning of article 5, of the amendments to the constitution of the United States, a,nd also by the principles of the common law, he was thereby being twice put in jeopardy, and on trial for the same offence.

To this plea the Attorney for the State demurred, and the question what judgment should be rendered was by the Superior Court reserved for the consideration and advice of this court.

The principle which protects an individual from the jeopardy involved in a second trial for the same offence is well established and fully recognized. The question however as to what constitutes a trial, depends upon the course of procedure of the particular jurisdiction in which it is had, and the construction of the courts there with respect' to it.

There are elsewhere highly respectable authorities in support of the position taken by the prisoner in his plea, but by the long continued practice in this state, if the prisoner does not claim a verdict, but waives his right to insist upon it, and the Attorney by the advice of the court enters a nolle prosequi, or a discontinuance of the prosecution, it is no bar to a subsequent trial for the same offence. 2 Swift’s Digest, 402.

The Superior Court is advised that the plea is insufficient.

In this opinion the other judges concurred.

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

Related

State v. Johns
439 A.2d 1049 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1981)
Hing Wan Wong v. Liquor Control Commission
273 A.2d 709 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1970)
State v. Langley
244 A.2d 366 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1968)
State v. Stankevicius
222 A.2d 356 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1966)
State v. Masse
1 Conn. Cir. Ct. 381 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1962)
State v. Masse
186 A.2d 553 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1962)
State v. Doolittle
158 A.2d 858 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1960)
State v. Holloway
130 A.2d 562 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1957)
Dentamaro v. Motor Vehicles Commissioner
130 A.2d 568 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1956)
See v. Gosselin
48 A.2d 560 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1946)
State v. Brunn
154 P.2d 826 (Washington Supreme Court, 1945)
Rosser v. Commonwealth
167 S.E. 257 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1933)
State v. Ellsworth.
42 S.E. 699 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1902)
State v. Lee
27 L.R.A. 498 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1894)
People v. White
37 N.W. 34 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1888)
People v. Gardner
29 N.W. 19 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
42 Conn. 232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-garvey-conn-1875.