State v. Moore

Connecticut Superior Court

State v. Moore

180 A.2d 758, 23 Conn. Super. Ct. 231, 23 Conn. Supp. 231, 1962 Conn. Super. LEXIS 101

DecidedFebruary 28, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 180 A.2d 758 (State v. Moore) 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. Moore, 180 A.2d 758, 23 Conn. Super. Ct. 231, 23 Conn. Supp. 231, 1962 Conn. Super. LEXIS 101 (Colo. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Division.

The defendants, John F. Moore, age nineteen, and Patrick D. Seno, age twenty-one, were found guilty, after a jury trial, on one count each of taking part in a disturbance at a state correctional institution, and each was sentenced to the state prison for not less than five nor more than nine years, such sentence, in each case, to run concurrently with the sentence then being served. The penalty provided for this crime by § 53-167a of the General Statutes is imprisonment for not more than fifteen years.

These two defendants were involved in the riot which occurred on July 25, 1961, at the Connecticut reformatory in Cheshire, during the course of which some 200 inmates disobeyed orders to return to the cell-block building after a recreation period, following which large numbers of this group hurled rocks, cursed, shouted, started fires and destroyed windows and other property at the reformatory. Dur *232 ing the course of this riot, which lasted for several hours and required the intervention of the state police to assist the armed correctional officers, these two defendants, who had been confined within the cell block for previous infractions of institutional rules, attempted to persuade other inmates similarly confined to make noise and break furniture, both participating in these activities themselves and inciting others to do so, the details of their actions being set forth in a bill of particulars filed in each case.

As to prior records, Moore had been convicted, over a three-year period, of two offenses of using a motor vehicle without permission, breach of peace, driving without a license, aggravated assault and intoxication, having been returned to the reformatory on February 17, 1961, as a parole violator, after being paroled December 16, 1960. Seno also had had two convictions of using a motor vehicle without permission and two of breaking and entering, having been returned to the reformatory November 21, 1960, for violation of parole.

Several of the inmates who participated in this disturbance of July 25, 1961, pleaded guilty and were sentenced, in the same court, to terms of from three to six years, while several others, who pleaded guilty to participation in not only this disturbance but also in a second riot which occurred at the reformatory on September 7, 1960, received concurrent sentences on two counts totaling six to seven years. The actual acts of violence committed by these two defendants do not appear to be as vicious as those of the others found guilty of participating, as they did, in only the first riot, and, of course, they were not involved at all in the second riot.

Taking into account the sentences imposed upon others who participated to the same or even to a *233 greater extent in the one riot, those imposed upon others who participated to a far greater extent in the two separate riots at Cheshire, the prior records of these defendants, and all of the circumstances involved, it would appear that these sentences should be, and they hereby are, reduced, in the case of each of these defendants, from “not less than five nor more than nine years” to “not less than three nor more than nine years,” such sentence, in the case of each defendant, to run concurrently with the sentence he was previously serving.

Covello, Healey and MacDonald, 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 defendants, John F. Moore, age nineteen, and Patrick D. Seno, age twenty-one, were found guilty, after a jury trial, on one count each of taking part in a disturbance at a state correctional institution, and each was sentenced to the state prison for not less than five nor more than nine years, such sentence, in each case, to run concurrently with the sentence then being served. The penalty provided for this crime by § 53-167a of the General Statutes is imprisonment for not more than fifteen years.

These two defendants were involved in the riot which occurred on July 25, 1961, at the Connecticut reformatory in Cheshire, during the course of which some 200 inmates disobeyed orders to return to the cell-block building after a recreation period, following which large numbers of this group hurled rocks, cursed, shouted, started fires and destroyed windows and other property at the reformatory. Dur *232 ing the course of this riot, which lasted for several hours and required the intervention of the state police to assist the armed correctional officers, these two defendants, who had been confined within the cell block for previous infractions of institutional rules, attempted to persuade other inmates similarly confined to make noise and break furniture, both participating in these activities themselves and inciting others to do so, the details of their actions being set forth in a bill of particulars filed in each case.

As to prior records, Moore had been convicted, over a three-year period, of two offenses of using a motor vehicle without permission, breach of peace, driving without a license, aggravated assault and intoxication, having been returned to the reformatory on February 17, 1961, as a parole violator, after being paroled December 16, 1960. Seno also had had two convictions of using a motor vehicle without permission and two of breaking and entering, having been returned to the reformatory November 21, 1960, for violation of parole.

Several of the inmates who participated in this disturbance of July 25, 1961, pleaded guilty and were sentenced, in the same court, to terms of from three to six years, while several others, who pleaded guilty to participation in not only this disturbance but also in a second riot which occurred at the reformatory on September 7, 1960, received concurrent sentences on two counts totaling six to seven years. The actual acts of violence committed by these two defendants do not appear to be as vicious as those of the others found guilty of participating, as they did, in only the first riot, and, of course, they were not involved at all in the second riot.

Taking into account the sentences imposed upon others who participated to the same or even to a *233 greater extent in the one riot, those imposed upon others who participated to a far greater extent in the two separate riots at Cheshire, the prior records of these defendants, and all of the circumstances involved, it would appear that these sentences should be, and they hereby are, reduced, in the case of each of these defendants, from “not less than five nor more than nine years” to “not less than three nor more than nine years,” such sentence, in the case of each defendant, to run concurrently with the sentence he was previously serving.

Covello, Healey and MacDonald, Js., participated in this decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

180 A.2d 758, 23 Conn. Super. Ct. 231, 23 Conn. Supp. 231, 1962 Conn. Super. LEXIS 101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-moore-connsuperct-1962.