128 Conn. App. 234
Conn. App. Ct.2011Background
- Defendant Toshio Ko Lokting appeals after a jury convicted him of conspiracy to commit larceny in the third degree and larceny in the sixth degree, and acquitted him of larceny in the third degree.
- The May 21, 2007 incident occurred in a New Canaan clothing store involving Lokting and Lozito, who browsed and then allegedly stole merchandise.
- Store personnel observed suspicious behavior; Lozito left with merchandise later recovered in Lozito’s car, with a store value confirmed around $1,800.
- Law enforcement recovered a photocopy of Lokting’s driver’s license on an eBay facsimile and a postage box bearing Lokting’s name in Lozito’s car.
- Lokting was arrested January 28, 2009, on charges including conspiracy to commit larceny in the third degree and larceny in the third degree.
- Lokting was sentenced to a three-year term with one year execution and five years of probation after conviction on the two counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| whether convictions are legally consistent | Lokting argues the verdicts are mutually exclusive | Lokting contends consistency requires invalidating one conviction | Convictions are not legally inconsistent |
| sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy conviction | State asserts sufficient cumulative evidence of agreement and overt act | Lokting contends insufficient proof of both agreement and monetary value | Evidence sufficient to sustain conspiracy conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hinton, 227 Conn. 301 (1993) (test for legal consistency of verdicts when reviewing facial contradictions)
- State v. Arroyo, 292 Conn. 558 (2009) (mutually exclusive convictions concept and standards of verdict consistency)
- State v. Green, 81 Conn.App. 152 (2004) (elements of conspiracy and overt act standard)
- State v. Hedge, 297 Conn. 621 (2010) (standard for evaluating circumstantial evidence in proving guilt)