State v. Holliday
In State v. Holliday, 159 Conn. 169, 268 A.2d 368 (1970), the defendants were charged with assault with intent to commit murder. After hearing evidence of the crime, the court excused the jury to hold "a preliminary hearing on whether to admit the details of a subsequent assault"; State v. Holliday, supra, at 171; on the victim.
"On the ground that the evidence, if believed, disclosed conduct on the part of the defendants indicating a consciousness of guilt, the court ruled that evidence of this second assault was admissible despite the protests of the defendants." Id.
The Holliday defendants claimed admission of the evidence of the second crime "outweighed its probative value in proving their guilt of the specific crimes charged, that it would inflame the jury, and that counsel was unprepared to defend his clients with respect to this second episode." Id.
"The correctness of this evidential ruling is the sole issue on this appeal, in which the defendants contend that the ruling was reversible error, in violation of the defendants' constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation and served to deprive them of their liberty without due process of law." State v. Holliday, supra, 159 Conn. at 171.