Skip to main content

State v. Marshall

Citations

  • 206 Conn. App. 209

Syllabus

The defendant, who had been convicted of assault in the first degree and multiple counts of burglary and who had his probation revoked following a trial to the court in 2009, appealed to this court from the judgment of the trial court denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence. The defendant also had pleaded guilty at his 2009 trial to being a persistent serious felony offender pursuant to statute (§ 53a-40 (c)) and the trial court, in 2010, enhanced the defendant's sentence pursuant to statute ((Rev. to 2007) § 53a-40 (j)) after determining that his extended incarcer- ation would best serve the public interest. In 2008, the legislature had amended § 53a-40 to remove the requirement of a public interest determi- nation. The defendant claimed that because he was sentenced in 2010, the sentencing judge improperly applied the 2007 revision of § 53a-40 (j) when it enhanced his sentence. The defendant also claimed in his motion to correct an illegal sentence that he was improperly denied a probable cause hearing and challenged the revocation of his parole. Following a hearing, the trial court denied the defendant's motion and the defendant appealed to this court. Held: 1. The trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to correct an illegal sentence and concluding that he was properly sentenced pursu- ant to the 2007 revision of § 53a-40 (j); the 2008 amendment to § 53a- 40 (j) contained no language stating that it applied retroactively and the absence of any such language indicated that the legislature intended for the amendment to apply prospectively only and, therefore, the sen- tencing judge was required to apply the statutory revision that was in existence in July, 2007, when the defendant committed the crimes. 2. The trial court properly concluded that the defendant waived his right to a jury trial on the public interest determination pursuant to (Rev. to 2007) § 53a-40 (j), and that the defendant was not required to admit that extended incarce

Judges: Bright; Alvord; Pellegrino

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.