STATE V. HARRINGTON 128 Vt. 242, 260 A.2d 692 (1969) CASE BRIEF

STATE V. HARRINGTON

128 Vt. 242, 260 A.2d 692 (1969)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Harrington (D) sought review of a judgment, which convicted him of the offense of threatening to accuse a person of the crime of adultery for the purpose of extortion in violation of Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, 1701.

FACTS: D was engaged in the general practice of law and consulted with Mrs. Norma Morin, the wife of the alleged victim, Armand E. Morin. Mrs. Morin had separated from her husband because of his recent and severe physical abuse. The Morins owned and operated a Motel. The marital estate of the parties had a net value of approximately $500,000. Mrs. Morin stated that her husband had also been guilty of numerous marital infidelities with different women at the motel. Mrs. Morin also disclosed that she had been guilty of marital misconduct which apparently had been condoned. A scheme was designed to procure the services of a girl who would visit the motel in an effort to obtain corroborative evidence of Morin's infidelity. A Mrs. Mazza was to be 'receptive and available,' but not aggressive. The agreement with Mrs. Mazza was that she would be paid one hundred dollars at the time she undertook the assignment and one hundred dollars when her mission was completed. A contingent fee agreement was signed by Mrs. Morin and the firm of Harrington and Jackson. D's firm was to receive twelve and a half percent of the settlement, in addition to reimbursement for expenses advanced by counsel. Electronic listening and recording equipment was ordered and delivered by air. Mrs. Mazza attracted Mr. Morin's attention. Morin went to Mrs. Mazza's room about midnight. Soon after the appointed hour D and his associates entered the room. With one or more cameras, several photographs were taken of Morin and Mrs. Mazza in bed and unclothed. Morin grabbed for one camera and broke it. Mrs. Mazza carried an electronic transmitter in her handbag. By means of this device, her conversations with Morin were monitored by D and his associates. A few days later in the presence of Mrs. Morin, a letter was dictated and sent to Mr. Morin. The communication was designated personal and confidential. It detailed an out of court settlement of divorce instead of a potentially explosive one. Any such settlement would include the return of all tape recordings, all negatives, all photographs and copies of photographs that might in any way, bring discredit Mr. Morin. Mrs. Morin would waive all alimony upon receipt of One Hundred Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($175,000). In the event that Mr. Morin did not accept it was made clear that divorce a divorce alleging adultery, including affidavits, alleging extreme cruelty and beatings, would be filed. D also threatened exposure to the IRS and Customs Service of other undisclosed improprieties. Enclosed was a photograph evidencing adultery taken by one the investigators on the early morning of March 8. D was charged with blackmail and convicted. D appealed.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner