State v. Brown
133 Conn. App. 140
Conn. App. Ct.2012Background
- Brown pleaded guilty to two narcotics offenses under two dockets as part of a plea agreement.
- The plea provided for nine years of incarceration (five years plus ten years special parole) in one docket and four years of incarceration (four years plus six years special parole) in the other, to run consecutively.
- The total effective sentence was nine years incarceration followed by sixteen years of special parole, with additional charges dismissed or nolle prosequi.
- At sentencing, the court confirmed the agreement and the defendant understood the total effective sentence and the sixteen-year special parole.
- In September 2009 Brown, self-represented, moved to correct an illegal sentence arguing the sixteen-year special-parole term exceeded the ten-year statutory maximum.
- The trial court denied the motion; on appeal, Brown challenged the legality of the sixteen-year special-parole term and requested remand for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sixteen-year special parole term exceeds statutory limits | Brown argued § 54-125e (c) cap applies to aggregate term | State contended limits apply per offense or per aggregate without excess | Court held the sixteen-year term exceeded the ten-year cap and was illegal |
| Whether consecutive sentences with multiple special-parole terms are allowed | Brown argued aggregate limit should apply, preventing over ten years | State argued consecutive sentences with separate special parole allowed | Court held consecutive sentences may include separate special parole terms but not exceed ten years per statute for non-excepted offenses |
| Remedy for illegal sentence given plea agreement | Brown sought remand to impose compliant sentence | State urged remedy that preserves plea and bargained terms | Court reversed and remanded for resentencing under aggregate package theory |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Tabone, 279 Conn. 527 (2006) (remanded for resentencing when aggregate sentence violated § 54-128(c))
- State v. Raucci, 21 Conn. App. 557 (1990) (aggregate sentencing framework for multicount convictions)
- State v. Miranda, 260 Conn. 93 (2002) (aggregate package theory adopted for resentencing)
- State v. Tabone, 292 Conn. 417 (2009) (Tabone II; remand under aggregate approach; sentencing after plea)