State v. Samson

Connecticut Superior Court

State v. Samson

164 A.2d 302, 22 Conn. Super. Ct. 175, 22 Conn. Supp. 175, 1960 Conn. Super. LEXIS 124

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedMay 3, 1960

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 164 A.2d 302 (State v. Samson) 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. Samson, 164 A.2d 302, 22 Conn. Super. Ct. 175, 22 Conn. Supp. 175, 1960 Conn. Super. LEXIS 124 (Colo. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Division.

The defendant, age thirty-three, pleaded guilty to the charge of manslaughter and was sentenced to the state prison for not less than twelve nor more than fifteen years. The maximum penalty for the offense is a fine of not more than $1000 or imprisonment for not more than fifteen years or both. General Statutes § 53-13.

On June 15, 1957, the defendant beat his mentally defective three-year-old daughter, who was ill at the time, in such a manner as to cause her death. The beating was administered as punishment for a household annoyance. His attempts to revive her failed and he placed her body in two shopping bags and buried the remains on the bank of the Housatonie River in New Milford. A year later the wife reported the incident to the police and he was picked up in 1959. There was evidence of previous mistreatments. The record of the defendant discloses some fifteen arrests after a commitment to the Maine State School for Boys in 1942 and a court martial and bad conduct discharge from the navy. Applica *176 tion was filed for the calling of a grand jury but it was subsequently withdrawn and the defendant allowed to plead to the manslaughter count. He now feels the penalty imposed was excessive and should have been not less than five nor more than ten years.

In passing sentence the court stated that “even on his own story, this is a crime of a most brutal nature, although under the circumstances, permitting a plea of manslaughter was justified. Particularly brutal considering the fact that the child was defective mentally.”

The sentence imposed was a proper one and should stand.

Devlin, House 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-three, pleaded guilty to the charge of manslaughter and was sentenced to the state prison for not less than twelve nor more than fifteen years. The maximum penalty for the offense is a fine of not more than $1000 or imprisonment for not more than fifteen years or both. General Statutes § 53-13.

On June 15, 1957, the defendant beat his mentally defective three-year-old daughter, who was ill at the time, in such a manner as to cause her death. The beating was administered as punishment for a household annoyance. His attempts to revive her failed and he placed her body in two shopping bags and buried the remains on the bank of the Housatonie River in New Milford. A year later the wife reported the incident to the police and he was picked up in 1959. There was evidence of previous mistreatments. The record of the defendant discloses some fifteen arrests after a commitment to the Maine State School for Boys in 1942 and a court martial and bad conduct discharge from the navy. Applica *176 tion was filed for the calling of a grand jury but it was subsequently withdrawn and the defendant allowed to plead to the manslaughter count. He now feels the penalty imposed was excessive and should have been not less than five nor more than ten years.

In passing sentence the court stated that “even on his own story, this is a crime of a most brutal nature, although under the circumstances, permitting a plea of manslaughter was justified. Particularly brutal considering the fact that the child was defective mentally.”

The sentence imposed was a proper one and should stand.

Devlin, House and Loiselle, Js., participated in this decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 A.2d 302, 22 Conn. Super. Ct. 175, 22 Conn. Supp. 175, 1960 Conn. Super. LEXIS 124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-samson-connsuperct-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack