Court Opinion

ID: 9701826
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 22:39:45.918536+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:30.009098
License: Public Domain

*305Bogdaxski, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I agree with, the disposition of the Grasso case hut not with the disposition of the Pastore appeal. The opinion states that “[ajfter argument on the appeal, the defendant Pastore died.” Because direct appeals in criminal cases are a matter of right, and because death will prevent any review on the merits of any such appeal, this court should follow the law enunciated by the Supreme Court of the United States and vacate the judgment and direct dismissal of all proceedings had against the deceased, Frank J. Pastore.
“|T)]eath pending direct review of a criminal conviction abates not only the appeal but also all proceedings had in the prosecution from its inception. ... [0]n death of the convicted petitioner the ‘cause has abated.’ ” Durham v. United States, 401 U.S. 481, 483, 91 S. Ct. 858, 28 L. Ed. 2d 200.
The law provides for two kinds of punishment, “pecuniary” and “corporal.” In Crooker v. United States, 325 F.2d 318 (8th Cir.) one of the judgments appealed from involved a fine as well as imprisonment. The court there held (p. 321) that “[a] fine is not something to which the United States is entitled by way of compensation or damages, but only as a matter of punishment being thereby meted upon the defendant. ‘It was imposed as a punishment of the defendant for his offense. If, while he lived, it had been collected, he would have been punished by the deprivation of that amount from his estate; but, upon his death, there is no justice in punishing his family for his offense.’ ” See also State v. Rutledge, 243 Iowa 201, 50 N.W.2d 801.
The offense for which the deceased Pastore was convicted was punishable by a fine as well as impris*306onment. General Statutes §§ 53a-28, 53a-lll— 53a-113. Had the trial court imposed both penalties, the majority of this court, by merely dismissing the appeal as moot, would not only allow the contested judgment of guilt to stand, but would also permit the state to proceed against the deceased’s estate to collect the fine. Thus, the result would be to punish his family and heirs rather than the deceased, in effect penalizing the younger generation for the alleged sins of the older generation without any justification for doing so.
I would, therefore, vacate the judgment as to Pastore and remand his case to the Superior Court with direction to dismiss all proceedings had in connection therewith.