The Waterbury Democrat., 1938-10-25

UUM DVAA8k HUI Haven County at New Haven and Waterbury" as shall be fixed and determined by the Judges of the Superior Court at their annual meeting. All civil actions within the Jurisdiction of the Superior Court brought in the County of New Haven may be brought to the court at New Haven or Water bury as the plaintifr may elect. and cases pending in either court may be transferred to the other court on consent of the parties, General Statutes. section 546l, and for cause shown may be trans ferred from either court to the other General Statutes, section 5460).
 General Statutes, section 639S, provides that criminal cases bound over by Justices of the Peace, borough or town courts in New Haven County, within the Judicial District of Waterbury, shall be to the Criminal Session of the Super for Court next to be held at Wa terbury, and all other eases of binding over in New Haven shall be to the Criminal Session of the court next to be held in New Haven.
 Section 63o9, which is entitled, Transfer of Criminal cases in New Haven County" provides as follows:
 "All cases bound over to the superior court at Waterbury may be transferred to the crim- inal sessions of said court at New Haven, and cases pending in the criminal sessions at New Haven may be transferred to the criminal sessions at Water bury; and any of such cases may be so transferred by order of the superior court at any criminal session held either at New Haven or Waterbury"
 It is suggester that these cases are not cases bound over to the Superior Court at Waterbury" but are cases instituted by infor- nation.
 Even so, 1t seems that in view of the fact that there Is but one Superior Court for New Haven County and the liberal provisions of the statutes permitting the transfer of cases from one place of sitting to the other, the dif- ference between pending cases and bound-over cases Is merely verbal and was not intended by the legislature to be strictly con- strued.
 It appears that the information is brought to the Superior Court for New Haven County sitting at Waterbury: If the statute is to be strictly construed, then a crirn- inal case brought to the Superior Court at Waterbury, either by in- dictment or information, would and while such cases could be be in a sort of "no-man land" transferred from New Haven to Waterbury, they could not be transferred from Waterbury to New Haven. It Is not to be con- templated the legislature intended any such result.
 In view of the foregoing the Court is of the opinion, that in view of the broad provisions Of the statutes, that 1t may, at Its reasonable discretion, and of its own motion, order the cases trans ferred to the Superior Court for New Haven County at New Haven. There is precedent for this ac- ton in the case of State v. Pecciu- lis (MitchelD and Kritchman, where an indictment was returned to the Superior Court for New Haven County at Waterbury, and during the trial transferred to New Haven. This proceeding does not appear to be noted In the printed record GA Conn. i62) but does so appear on the records or the court at Waterbury.
 It was suggested by the special states attorney that his appoint ment might be affected by a trans fer of the cases to New Haven. The Court does not agree with this suggestion. It appears that his appointment, as well as those of his assistants, were made by an order of this court and by vir- tue of section 5367 of the General Statutes as amended (829dl. The appointments were upon States Attorney, whose duty 1t would have been to prosecute the cases, for reasons sufficient to the Court, personally disqualifying himself, At any rate, the Court is of the opinion that public interests re- quire that the same appointments be continued, for the same rea- sons, to prosecute cases to effect, The Court has therefore reached the conclusion that sufficient grounds were not shown to justify the Court in its judicial discre- tion to transfer the cases to all- other country, and thus grant change of venue.
 It Is ordered, however, that the cases be transferred to the Supe- rior Court at New Haven, there to he entered upon the docket at once and prosecuted to effect, or otherwise disposed of according to law.
 It is also ordered that the ap- pointnent of the special prose- cutur and his assistants be and hereby IS confirmed, and he and each of them are hereby appoint ed as special prosecutor and as- sistants, respectively, to prosecute the cases to effect.
 SIMPSON. J.
 STATE PROJECTS
 Hartford. Conn. Oct. 26.--(Up)--