State v. Roberts

Syllabus

The defendant, who had been convicted, following a jury trial, of, inter alia, carrying a pistol without a permit in violation of statute ((Rev. to 2017) § 29-35 (a)), appealed to this court from the judgment of the trial court denying his motion to dismiss and/or set aside the conviction. Although the defendant had grown up in Bridgeport, he claimed to be a resident of Ohio who was visiting his family in Connecticut when he shot and killed a woman he had been dating. He purchased the pistol he used to commit the murder in Ohio, and he never applied for or obtained a permit to carry the weapon in Connecticut. In his motion to dismiss, the defendant claimed that his conviction should be vacated in light of the United States Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen (597 U.S. 1), which was decided the day before his sentencing, because § 29-35 (a) violated his right to bear arms under the second amendment to the United States constitution and subjected him to disparate treatment as a nonresident of Connecticut in violation of the privileges and immunities clause of the United States constitution. The trial court denied the motion, and the defendant appealed, arguing that the conviction violated his second amendment rights because he could not have applied for or obtained a permit under the statute governing the issuance of permits to Connecticut residents, ((Rev. to 2017) § 29-28 (b)), as he was not a bona fide permanent resident of Connecticut, and he could not have applied for or obtained a permit pursuant to § 29-28 (f), as that subsection applied only to nonresidents who had a permit or license to carry a pistol or revolver issued by the authority of another state, and he did not have a permit from Ohio because he was not required to have one in that state. The defendant further argued that his conviction violated his rights under the privileges and immunities clause to the United States constitution because Con- necticut's per