State v. Hinton
In State v. Hinton, 227 Conn. 301, 630 A.2d 593 (1993) the Court addressed the issue of whether a person could intentionally assault one victim and, in the same action, recklessly assault another victim. The defendant was convicted of assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes 53a-59 (a) (1) and (2), which requires that the defendant act intentionally, and assault in violation of 53a-59 (a) (3), which requires that the defendant act recklessly.
The court stated that the guilty verdicts could be reconciled.
"The jury could reasonably have concluded that, in attempting to injure or disfigure someone standing near the victim, the defendant acted recklessly toward the victim and therefore recklessly caused injury to the victim, satisfying the elements of subdivision (3). Although we said in State v. King, supra, 216 Conn. at 585, that a person could not act intentionally and recklessly with regard to the same act and the same result, here we have two different victims and therefore two different results. The jury therefore could reasonably have found that when the defendant fired the shotgun at the group of ten to fifteen young men on the sidewalk, causing eight pellets to be fired, he intended to injure one or more of them and was reckless with regard to the rest, including the victim." State v. Hinton, supra, 227 Conn. at 314-15.