State v. Brelsford

Citations

• 227 Conn. App. 53

Syllabus

The defendant, who had previously been convicted, following a guilty plea, of the crimes of kidnapping in the second degree with a firearm, attempt to commit murder, robbery in the first degree with a deadly weapon, and two counts of risk of injury to a child, filed a motion for sentence modification pursuant to statute (§ 53a-39). In his motion, the defendant provided evidence of, inter alia, his completion of several rehabilitative programs during his incarceration. In denying the defendant's motion, the court stated that it had considered the factors set forth in the statute (§ 54-125a (f) (4)) governing parole eligibility and suitability and concluded that the defendant had not established good cause to modify his sentence pursuant to § 53a-39 when balanced against the facts and harm created by the serious crimes he had committed. On the defen- dant's appeal to this court, held that the defendant could not prevail on his claim that the trial court abused its discretion in finding that he had failed to establish good cause to modify his sentence pursuant to § 53a- 39: although the defendant argued that the weight and value that the court assigned to the statutory parole framework when assessing good cause pursuant to § 53a-39 was inappropriate, he conceded that the trial court was free to consider the factors in § 54-125 in arriving at its conclusion; moreover, the court did not limit its consideration of the defendant's motion to the factors enumerated in § 54-125, and, although the defendant argued that the court should have relied more heavily on his rehabilitation and certain other factors, he did not cite any legal authority that governs the degree of weight a court must afford factors that it considers in determining whether good cause has been estab- lished. Argued November 9, 2023—officially released July 30, 2024