State v. Rucker
State of Connecticut v. Earl Rucker
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
The defendant appeals from his conviction, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree *177 in violation of General Statutes § 53a-59 (a) (1). His sole claim on appeal is that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction. We find no error.
The state’s evidence, which the jury was free to believe, was that the defendant struck the victim on the head at least three times with a hammer, causing a depressed skull fracture which resulted in traumatic epilepsy and traumatic labyrinthitis, an inner ear disability. The defendant assaulted the victim as she was kneeling in front of her kitchen sink after getting some nails which the defendant, a neighbor, had asked her to give him for repairs which he was making. The appeal of the defendant, who claimed self-defense, does no more than ask us to substitute his version of the incident for the contrary and compelling evidence which the jury believed.
There is no error.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(defendant charged with and convicted of one count of assault in first degree after striking victim at least three times with hammer)
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.