State v. Jason B., 320 Conn. 259

Defendant Jason B. was convicted (2006 jury) of first‑degree sexual assault (class B) and first‑degree unlawful restraint (class D).
Sentencing: 5 years for unlawful restraint, consecutive 20 years for sexual assault (execution suspended after 10), and 35 years probation — effective total: 25 years incarceration, suspended after 15, and 35 years probation.
Defendant moved to correct an allegedly illegal sentence, arguing Gen. Stat. § 53a‑70(b)(3) requires a sentence of imprisonment plus a period of special parole for first‑degree sexual assault and that the special parole period must be deducted from his original effective term.
Trial court granted the motion in part, held § 53a‑70(b)(3) mandated special parole, but declined to deduct the special parole period from the original effective sentence; resentenced to 5 years + consecutive 10 years imprisonment and 10 years special parole for sexual assault.
State appealed; Supreme Court in a companion decision (State v. Victor O.) held § 53a‑70(b)(3) does not mandate special parole but only requires that, if special parole is imposed, the combined imprisonment and special parole total at least ten years.

Issue	State's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 53a‑70(b)(3) mandates a period of special parole for first‑degree sexual assault	§ 53a‑70(b)(3) does not require special parole; it only sets a minimum combined length if both imprisonment and special parole are imposed	§ 53a‑70(b)(3) requires a term of imprisonment and a period of special parole for convictions of first‑degree sexual assault	Held for State: statute does not mandate special parole; it governs combined minimum length if special parole is imposed
Whether resentencing must deduct the special parole period from the original effective sentence to avoid increasing the sentence	Not reached as primary issue after statutory interpretation; court reversed trial court’s partial grant	Argued trial court must deduct special parole from original effective term to avoid unlawful expansion	Not decided (unnecessary): because § 53a‑70(b)(3) does not mandate special parole, deduction issue need not be resolved

State v. Victor O., 301 Conn. 163 (Conn. 2011) (earlier Victor O. decision cited in parties’ arguments)
State v. Victor O., 320 Conn. 239 (Conn. 2016) (companion decision holding § 53a‑70(b)(3) does not mandate special parole)
State v. Tabone, 292 Conn. 417 (Conn. 2009) (parole treated as an extension of incarceration for certain sentencing analyses)
State v. Raucci, 21 Conn. App. 557 (Conn. App. 1990) (new sentence cannot exceed original total effective sentence)
State v. Jason B., 111 Conn. App. 359 (Conn. App. 2008) (Appellate Court decision affirming convictions)