State v. Honsch

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s murder conviction, holding that Connecticut could exercise territorial jurisdiction because the victim’s body was found in the state and the evidence showed it had been recently deposited there. The court also held that the evidence, including consciousness-of-guilt conduct and physical evidence, sufficiently established the defendant’s identity, and that the trial court properly declined to give the requested palm-print instruction because the palm prints were not the only or principal evidence connecting him to the crime.