state v jacobson 2005 case brief
In Jenkins, during rebuttal argument, the prosecutor stated: Where is justice in our society? The burden of proof is on the state to prove that a defendant is predisposed to violate the law before the government intervenes. The next day, M accompanied the defendant and B to breakfast, but decided not to mention what had occurred the night before. While a prosecutor may not interject personal opinion about the credibility or truthfulness of a witness, he may comment on the credibility of the witness as long as the comment reflects reasonable inferences from the evidence adduced at trial. (Internal quotation marks omitted.) It determined, however, that the defendant had committed the lesser included offense of Attempting to fight smallpox in the early 20th century, Cambridge, Mass., officials passed regulations, under state law, requiring vaccination. Henning Jacobson refused to comply. He was tried, convicted, and ordered to pay a $5 fine. He appealed. 2. State Power to Vaccinate First, the evidence must be relevant and material to at least one of the circumstances encompassed by the exceptions Second, the probative value of the evidence must outweigh its prejudicial effect. That night, M and the defendant again stayed at B's house, the sleeping arrangements being the same. WebBrief Fact Summary. State v. Morales, 84 Conn.App. As such, the defendant's claim must fail. We conclude that the admission of the testimony concerning prior misconduct was harmless. 1. The trial court's ruling on evidentiary matters will be overturned only upon a showing of a clear abuse of the court's discretion We will make every reasonable presumption in favor of upholding the trial court's ruling, and only upset it for a manifest abuse of discretion [Thus, our] review of such rulings is limited to the questions of whether the trial court correctly applied the law and reasonably could have reached the conclusion that it did It is a fundamental rule of appellate procedure in the review of evidential rulings, whether resulting in the admission or exclusion of evidence, that an appellant has the burden of establishing that there has been an erroneous ruling which was probably harmful to him. (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) No. State v. Jacobson. denied, 253 Conn. 914, 915, 754 A.2d 163 (2000). The judge instructed the jury on Jacobsons entrapment defense. As to the second victim, B, the defendant was convicted of one count of attempt to commit sexual assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes 53a-49(a)(2) and 53a-70(a)(2), one count of sexual assault in the third degree in violation of General Statutes 53a-72a(a) (1)(A) and three counts of risk of injury to a child in violation of General Statutes (Rev. Id. Jacobson was subsequently charged with conspiracy to procure unlawful voting in violation of Minn.Stat. Rather the evidence relates to disproving or negating an element of the crime charged. 609.175 (2004), and conspiracy to commit forgery in violation of Minn.Stat. Despite the defendant's argument that the other fifty-three photographs served only to suggest that he had strange sexual proclivities, they may have, in fact, served his interests. The Nature and Scope of Fourteenth Amendment Due Process; The Applicability of the Bill of Rights to the States, The Right to Counsel, Transcripts and Other Aids; Poverty, Equality and the Adversary System, Lineups, Showups and Other Pre-Trial Identification Procedures, Speedy Trial and Other Speedy Disposition, LSAT Logic Games (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning I (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning II (June 2007 Practice Exam). That night, before B fell asleep, the defendant, who was naked, approached B, fondled his penis, giving him an erection, and attempted unsuccessfully to have B sodomize him. 2d 413 (1990)). Further, the prosecutor did not emphasize or rely on the testimony during closing argument. Additional facts will be set forth as necessary. In 1985, government agencies began investigating Jacobson's interest in child pornography. After his arrest, the only evidence the police found that indicated that Jacobson was interested in child pornography were the letters and brochures sent to him by the government. However, in explaining the intent required to establish conspiracy we have stated: A conscious and intentional purpose to break the law is an essential element of the crime of conspiracy ***. State v. Kuhnau, 622 N.W.2d 552, 556 (Minn.2001) (emphasis added). Jacobson opposed the state's motion on five separate grounds. He also returned periodically to Connecticut to visit them both. WebMassachusetts (1905), the Supreme Court upheld a states mandatory compulsory smallpox vaccination law over the challenge of a pastor who alleged that it violated his religious Yet, he can't remember the last name of this young boy whose hair it was, that you had in your possession and considered hockey memorabilia.. Don't Miss Important Points of Law with BARBRI Outlines (Login Required). She welcomed the help and even let B, who was not a team member, tag along for the rides. 90-1124. Outside of the jury's presence, the state offered into evidence all fifty-nine photographs, arguing that [i]t goes to the interest-the intent, the interest this defendant has in young boys. The court ruled, over the defendant's objection, that all fifty-nine photographs were admissible. Similarly, evidence of Jacobson's mistake of law based on his reliance on the advice of his attorney and on the letter from Chief Deputy Dakota County Attorney Prokopowicz is relevant to the issue of Jacobson's intent and thus need not be objectively reasonable to be presented to the jury. Our holding is grounded in constitutional law and our recognition that it is fundamental that criminal defendants have a due process right to explain their conduct to a jury. State v. Brechon, 352 N.W.2d 745, 751 (Minn.1984); see also In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257, 273, 68 S.Ct. denied, 272 Conn. 901, 863 A.2d 696 (2004). The government received defendant's name as a potential target for future pornography-encouraging mailings. Distinguishing Mills, we concluded that the prosecutor's comments were not improper and that they did not infringe on the defendant's right to a fair trial. In November 2002, two council seats and the mayor position were on the ballot. On the drive to the police station, she expressed to B her frustration with M and his mother, telling B that it was a waste of time to go to the police department. Jacobson was subsequently charged with conspiracy to procure unlawful voting in violation of Minnesota state 204C.14 ( 3). WebCriminal Law State v. Loge Gwen Upah Facts: Steven Mark Loge had borrowed his fathers truck, and when stooped for apparent speeding, an officer observed a bottle sticking partially out of a brown paper bag underneath the passengers side of the seat. Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. One exception to the general rule barring evidence of uncharged misconduct is that such evidence is admissible if it is offered to prove a common plan or scheme To be admissible under the common scheme exception, the marks which the uncharged and the charged offenses have in common must be such that it may be logically inferred that if the defendant is guilty of one he must be guilty of the other To guide that analysis, [our Supreme Court has] held that [e]vidence of prior sex offenses committed with persons other than the prosecuting witness is admissible to show a common design or plan where the prior offenses (1) are not too remote in time; (2) are similar to the offense charged; and (3) are committed upon persons similar to the prosecuting witness. (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Its rationale was that all of the pictures involved, with the exception of one where there is a young girl there, all of them are young boys. We conclude that the jury instruction at issue in this case-that the court would not require specific times, dates and places that will render prosecution of those who sexually abuse children impossible-did not relieve the state of its burden to prove an essential element of the crime charged, as [i]t is a well-established rule in this state that it is not essential in a criminal prosecution that the crime be proved to have been committed on the precise date alleged, it being competent ordinarily for the prosecution to prove the commission of the crime charged at any time prior to the date of the complaint and within the period fixed by the statute of limitations. (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) It cites the following language from the rebuttal closing argument: There was testimony about the hair, that it came from somebody that cut their hair at a hockey tournament. Mills and Gold are readily distinguishable from the present case. Defendant challenged the affirmance. That does not mean, however, that the absence of an objection at trial does not play a significant role in our analysis of the defendant's claim. 319, 325, 848 A.2d 1271 (2004). Without those photographs, the jury would have been left with the impression that the defendant possessed photographs only of the two victims. All rights reserved. That's the only information the young boys gave to the witnesses. Jacobson v. United States ( 503 U.S. 540, 1992) U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the government's action of repeatedly, for two and a half years, sending a man advertisements of material of a sexual nature causing the man to order an illegal sexually oriented magazine, constituted entrapment. 202, 748 A.2d 318, cert. In the letter, Chief Deputy Prokopowicz informed the city that the Dakota County Attorney's Office had concluded that there was no criminal wrongdoing by the police officers and thus the office was closing its investigation of the matter.3 Jacobson asserted in his affidavit that [w]ith Mr. Tigue's counsel and [advice], and relying on a review of Minnesota's election laws and the letter by Mr. Prokopowicz, he and several of his employees devised a plan to get people to register to vote using Jakes as a residence.. Thus, the Court in Cheek held that the defendant's good faith belief that the tax laws did not impose any duties on him did not have to be objectively reasonable in order to be considered by the jury as evidence negating his intent. Jacobson pleaded not guilty to the charges. We conclude that the jury instruction at issue in this case-that the court would not require specific times, dates and places that will render prosecution of On October 14, 2002, investigating officers executed a search warrant for Jakes and a vehicle registered to Jacobson. The district court granted the state's motion to exclude the evidence at issue and barred Jacobson from asserting the defenses of reliance on advice of counsel and reliance on an official interpretation of the law. And the defendant, I think he said the kid's name And I asked questions about, Well, you knew this was part of the case. In connection with the motion, Jacobson submitted an affidavit stating that for the past several years he had retained an attorney, Randall Tigue, to attend to various civil matters. 06-K-00061 Southeast Judicial District, McIntosh County Bruce B. Haskell EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF 8: Any improper evidence that may have a tendency to excite the passions, awaken the sympathy, or influence the judgment, of the jury, cannot be considered as harmless That the defendant's abuse of the other girls was not as severe as his abuse of [the victim] does not mean that the evidence of such abuse was harmless. 1. WebJacobson was arrested when the magazine was delivered. Although we agree with the defendant that the court's evidentiary ruling was improper, we conclude that the impropriety was harmless. She introduced the defendant to her son, who was seven or eight years old at the time, and the two quickly became friends. A mistake of law that negates the mental state of the charged offense is not a defense in the sense that the defendant carries the burden of persuasion. The district court granted the state's motion, barred Jacobson from asserting the defenses of reliance on advice of counsel and reliance on an official interpretation of the law, and certified two questions to the court of appeals. In doing so, she came across the defendant's brief-case in a closet next to his bedroom, in which she discovered, among other things, fifty-nine photographs, primarily of young boys, including two of M and four of B. 682 (1948) (stating that an opportunity to be heard in his defense is basic in our system of jurisprudence). All three positions were contested. The Supreme Court determined that the inclusion of the evidence was harmful: [T]he testimony of [the three other girls] was potentially prejudicial to the defendant in [the victim's] case and we cannot conclude that it was harmless. The state argues that Jacobson is precluded from using any evidence of his reliance at trial because the district court found that Jacobson's reliance on advice of counsel and on an official interpretation of the law was unreasonable. Whether the defenses of reliance on advice of counsel and on an official interpretation are available to the Defendant under Minnesota law? Id., at 207 n. 8, 748 A.2d 318. The defendant was not found with any other illegal materials. Whats Jacobson About? Under Minnesota law, conspiracy occurs when one conspires with another to commit a crime and requires proof that in furtherance of the conspiracy one or more of the parties does some overt act. Minn.Stat. The court of appeals answered both questions in the affirmative. The defendant requests that we review his unpreserved claims under State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233, 239-40, 567 A.2d 823 (1989); the plain error doctrine; Practice Book 60-5; and this court's supervisory powers. TermsPrivacyDisclaimerCookiesDo Not Sell My Information, Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select, Stay up-to-date with FindLaw's newsletter for legal professionals. 263, 270-72, 829 A.2d 919 (2003). Although we agree with the defendant that the court improperly admitted some of the photographs into evidence, we conclude that the improper admission was harmless. If we allow this to happen, we are all in trouble. WebWe discuss briefly, first, the issue of the sufficiency of the evidence produced at trial. Argued October 22, 2004 officially released February 15, 2005 (Appeal from Superior Further, the time it took the government (twenty six months) to get a purchase from the defendant demonstrated that, but for the constant mailings from the government, the defendant would not have made the illegal purchases. Jacobson stipulated that, with the exception of Tigue's written request for a copy of any written opinion on the police officer matter, there was no other contact with the county attorney's office regarding the registration or election laws or the legitimacy of Jacobson's plan. WebIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF UTAH CLYDE A. JACOBSON and REGINA J. JACOBSON, Plaintiffs-Appellants, vs . Ct. R. 37.1. In a case involving an evidentiary ruling, it is the defendant's burden to show that it is more probable than not that the court's action affected the result Some degree of prejudice inevitably accompanies the admission of evidence of a defendant's other misconduct. (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., at 538-39, 800 A.2d 1200. She testified that she met the defendant sometime in 1990 or 1991, when she was going through a difficult divorce. We hold that evidence of Jacobson's mistake of law is admissible because it is relevant to whether he intended to break the law-an element of the conspiracy charges. Annual Subscription ($175 / Year). B responded: I know this happened to [M] because it happened to me, too.. M saw the defendant about twice a week during the football season and once a week after the football season ended, and occasionally he stayed the night at the defendant's home, along with B. granted on other grounds, 272 Conn. 905, 863 A.2d 699 (2004). We therefore hold that evidence relating to a defendant's misunderstanding of the law is admissible when relevant to whether the defendant had the intent required for the charged offense. at 454, 866 A.2d 678. Under the current and long-standing state of the law in Connecticut, the burden to prove the harmfulness of an improper evidentiary ruling is borne by the defendant. WebJacobson declares that even when exercising police powers in an emergency, states still are limited by constitutional rights. He purchased a cell phone for M and called him regularly for updates on his schoolwork. In applying these principles to the present case, the Appellate Court concluded that the trial court had abused its discretion in allowing the state to adduce K's testimony. S 166 (U.S. Apr. The bag was marked for identification, but was not admitted into evidence as an exhibit. Issue. The second incident occurred a few weeks after the first incident. 1(6) (2004), and 609.175. 169.122(3), the State need not prove that the driver and sole See Practice Book 60-2. Respondent State of Minnesota charged Jacobson with first-degree sale of a controlled substance and possession of a firearm as an ineligible person. We conclude that the prosecutor's comments were not improper and, thus, reject the defendant's claim. Sometime later, the defendant registered B to play on a youth football team. Whats Jacobson About? She flew back the next day, contacted the police department and was told that the defendant allegedly had sexually assaulted M. According to B's mother, she refused to believe the allegation. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1905 in Jacobson v. Massachusetts that Jacobson's religious rights had to give way to the common good, and that the emergency situation justified the government's action. (Image, public domain) In Jacobson v. The officers found no evidence that anyone was residing at Jakes. Although the boys in the photographs were not nude, a few were shirtless. Because the existence of intent is a question of fact, it must be submitted to the jury. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. 240, 96 L.Ed. 604. The defendant must show that it is more probable than not that the erroneous action of the court affected the result Furthermore, [t]he ruling of the trial court in order to constitute reversible error must have been both incorrect and harmful The question is whether the trial court's error was so prejudicial as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, or, stated another way, was the court's ruling, though erroneous, likely to affect the result. (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Of course, as the Court noted in Cheek, the more unreasonable the beliefs, the more likely the jury will consider them to be nothing more than simple disagreement with known legal duties. 498 U.S. at 203-04, 111 S.Ct. The jury reasonably could have found the following facts. Thus, he argues in his brief that [t]he only reason to include that incident was to suggest to the jury that if the relationship had continued, [the defendant] was likely to have sexually assaulted [K's son] as well. The state counters that similarities in the method the defendant used to gain the young boys' trust demonstrated a common scheme. Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192, 199, 111 S.Ct. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905) is the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case involving vaccination mandates, or laws which require individuals to Case No. After his arrest, the only evidence the police found that indicated that Jacobson was interested in child The third incident occurred a few months later, again at the defendant's house. With those principles in mind, we address the four alleged instances of prosecutorial misconduct. We now turn to the state's argument that, even if the defenses of reliance on advice of counsel and reliance on an official interpretation of the law exist in Minnesota, any reliance by a defendant must be reasonable in order to assert the defenses at trial. denied, 269 Conn. 911, 852 A.2d 741 (2004). Service 2901, 92 Daily Journal DAR 4584, 6 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. State v. Jacobson, 681 N.W.2d 398, 410 (Minn.App.2004). At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the web.