Skip to main content

State v. Johnson

Citations

  • 345 Conn. 174

Syllabus

Convicted of numerous crimes, including sexual assault in the first degree and unlawful restraint in the first degree, the defendant appealed to this court. The defendant had entered an apartment in which two sisters, F and M, were staying, where he threatened them with a revolver, forced them to undress, prevented them from leaving, and assaulted them sexually. At some point, M fled the apartment and encountered C, and one of C's companions called 911. F and M were transported to a hospital, where a nurse evaluated them and administered sexual assault kits. The defendant was arrested, and the police seized the clothing and jewelry he was wearing at the time of his arrest and the clothing he had worn the day of the incident. At the defendant's jury trial, R, a DNA analyst at the state forensic laboratory, testified about the comparison between known DNA profiles, which were taken from the defendant, F, and M, and DNA profiles from evidentiary samples, which were taken from the sexual assault kits, swabs of the defendant's clothes and jewelry, and a cigarette butt found in the apartment. R explained that F's and M's DNA profiles were included in the DNA profile drawn from the defen- dant's jeans, that M's DNA profile was included in profiles generated from the defendant's underpants, and that F's and the defendant's DNA profiles were both included in the DNA profile drawn from the cigarette butt. N, a biologist at the state laboratory, also testified regarding the forensic analysis performed in relation to the defendant's case, specifi- cally, about the presence of certain substances found in samples from the sexual assault kits and the defendant's clothing. The state also presented evidence that the defendant was wearing a global positioning system (GPS) monitoring device at the time of the incident, which revealed that he was at or near the apartment around the time in question. The defendant filed a posttrial motion for a new trial, claiming that his 345 Conn. 174

Judges: Robinson; McDonald; D’Auria; Mullins; Kahn; Ecker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

38 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.