Skip to main content

State v. Bryan

Citations

  • 229 Conn. App. 364

Syllabus

The defendant appealed from the trial court's denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. The defendant claimed, inter alia, that his guilty plea in the underlying criminal trial to being a persistent dangerous felony offender in violation of statute (§ 53a-40) was defective. Held: The trial court improperly denied the defendant's motion to correct an illegal sentence because the motion challenged the validity of the defendant's guilty plea and the propriety of the plea proceedings, rather than the sentence or sentencing proceedings, and, accordingly, the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the motion and should have dismissed the motion. This court declined to review the defendant's unpreserved claim that the sentencing court improperly failed to specify which portion of his sentence was attributable to the enhancement imposed pursuant to § 53a-40. Argued October 22—officially released November 26, 2024

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • ‘‘[i]t is well established . . . that [t]he trial court’s lack of subject matter jurisdiction does not . . . deprive this court of appellate jurisdiction to determine whether the trial court had jurisdiction’’ (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Alvord; Elgo; Clark

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

1 case in this archive cites this case.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.