Summary
The Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Court’s judgment concerning whether General Statutes § 53a-32 authorizes a trial court to impose a sentence including special parole after revocation of probation. The court adopted the Appellate Court’s opinion, which concluded that the sentence was not illegal and that the defendant’s motion to correct should have been denied rather than dismissed.
Holdings
- General Statutes § 53a-32 (d) authorizes a trial court, following a violation and revocation of probation, to impose a sentence that includes a period of special parole; the defendant's sentence was therefore not illegal on that ground.
- The trial court should have denied, rather than dismissed, the defendant's motion to correct an illegal sentence.
Questions Presented
- Whether General Statutes § 53a-32 (d) authorizes a trial court, following a probation violation and revocation, to impose a sentence that includes a period of special parole.
- Whether the trial court should have denied, rather than dismissed, the defendant's motion to correct an illegal sentence.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (3)
- State v. Battle, 192 Conn. App. 128, 147, 217 A.3d 637 (2019)(adopted)
- R.T. Vanderbilt Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., 333 Conn. 343, 357, 216 A.3d 629 (2019)(cited)
- State v. Henderson, 330 Conn. 793, 799, 201 A.3d 389 (2019)(cited)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…