State v. Vivo

Citations

• 197 Conn. App. 363

Syllabus

The defendant, who had been previously convicted of the crimes of murder and assault in the first degree and whose sentence was enhanced pursu- ant to statute (§ 53-202k) for the commission of class A and B felonies with a firearm, appealed to this court from the judgment of the trial court dismissing his motion to correct an illegal sentence. On appeal, the defendant claimed that the trial court improperly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to consider his motion because there was evidence that, in the course of the underlying shootings, he had used a weapon that was specifically exempted from the ambit of § 53-202k, and, there- fore, his sentence enhancement pursuant to that statute was illegal. Held that the trial court properly dismissed the defendant's motion to correct an illegal sentence; for that court to have jurisdiction over that motion after the sentence had been executed, the sentencing proceeding, and not the proceedings leading to the conviction, had to be the subject of the attack, and the defendant's claim here, in essence, that the state did not present sufficient evidence to prove that § 53-202k was applica- ble, did not challenge the legality of his sentence or the sentence proceed- ing but, rather, the evidence that underpinned his conviction, and, there- fore, a motion to correct an illegal sentence was not the proper procedural path for the defendant to raise such a claim, as it challenged his underlying conviction. Argued January 21—officially released May 19, 2020