State v. Small

Citations

• 207 Conn. App. 349

Syllabus

The defendant, who had been convicted of several crimes, including capital felony, appealed to this court, claiming that the trial court erred in denying his request for the appointment of counsel to represent him on a motion to correct an illegal sentence that he had filed, as required by State v. Francis (322 Conn. 247). After the self-represented defendant filed his motion, it was reviewed by B, a public defender, who thereafter filed a report with the trial court, stating that no sound basis existed for the filing of the motion. B further stated in his report that he had notified the defendant by letter of the reasons for that conclusion and that the Office of the Public Defender would not represent him in the hearing on the motion. The trial court thereafter rejected the defendant's assertion that, as an indigent defendant, he was required to have counsel pursuant to Francis and denied the motion to correct. On appeal, the defendant claimed that his right to counsel was violated because, con- trary to the requirement of Francis, B did not consult with him regarding the motion to correct or inform him or the court of the reasons underlying his conclusion that no sound basis existed for the motion. Held that the trial court's denial of the defendant's motion to correct an illegal sentence was reversed and the case was remanded to that court with direction to appoint counsel to represent the defendant to determine, in accordance with Francis, whether a sound basis exists for that motion; because B failed to inform the trial court of his reasons for concluding that no sound basis existed for the motion, the court was not able to fulfill its obligation under Francis to consider B's reasoning, and, if persuaded by that reasoning, to permit B to withdraw as counsel for the defendant, as B's one paragraph report simply stated that he reviewed the motion, determined that no sound basis existed for it and informed the defendant by letter of the reasons for his conclusion