History
  • No items yet
midpage
Gould v. Reincke
155 Conn. 703
Conn.
1967
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

In February, 1964, the plaintiff was arrested pursuant to a Superior Court bench warrant issued on an application unsupported by oath or affirmation. Thereafter, he was presented in the Superior Court and pleaded guilty to four counts of breaking and entering, to one count of possession of burglars’ tools, and to a count charging him with being a second offender. He was sentenced to the state prison, where he is now confined. In December, 1965, he brought this petition for habeas corpus, acting pro se. The writ issued, and counsel was appointed to represent him. The petition, as amended, alleged the imprisonment to be illegal because the arrest was in violation of the fourth and fourteenth amendments to the constitution of the United States and of article first, § 8, of the Con*704necticut constitution (now article first, § 7, of the 1965 Connecticut constitution). Following a hearing, the petition was denied, the judgment was certified for review, and the plaintiff has appealed.

The disposition of the appeal is governed by our decisions in Reed v. Reincke, 155 Conn. 591, 599, 236 A.2d 909, and D’Amico v. Reincke, 155 Conn. 627, 629, 236 A.2d 914.

There is no error.

Case Details

Case Name: Gould v. Reincke
Court Name: Supreme Court of Connecticut
Date Published: Dec 7, 1967
Citation: 155 Conn. 703
Court Abbreviation: Conn.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.