State v. Johnson, 316 Conn. 34

Jennifer Johnson was convicted after a jury trial of multiple drug offenses, including conspiracy to possess narcotics with intent to sell (greater offense) and conspiracy to possess narcotics (lesser included offense); the trial court imposed concurrent five-year terms (execution suspended after 18 months) for each narcotics count, yielding a five-year effective sentence.
The Appellate Court held the two conspiracy convictions violated double jeopardy (lesser included offense cannot be separately convicted) and reversed the conviction and sentence for the lesser offense.
The Appellate Court also vacated the sentence for the greater conspiracy count and remanded for resentencing under the aggregate package theory, while leaving other sentences intact.
The State appealed only the Appellate Court’s decision to vacate the sentence for the greater offense and to remand for resentencing; it did not challenge vacatur of the lesser conspiracy conviction.
The Supreme Court considered whether the reviewing court was required to order resentencing on the remaining (greater) conviction when vacatur of the lesser offense did not change the total effective sentence or the predicate conduct relied on at sentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Johnson)	Held
Whether remand for resentencing under the aggregate package theory was required after vacatur of a lesser included offense when the total effective sentence and predicate conduct remain unchanged	Remand was unnecessary and conflicts with State v. Polanco; disturbing the greater offense sentence is neither required nor appropriate	Because the record does not show the trial court’s original sentencing intent, remand for resentencing was proper under the aggregate package theory	The trial court has discretion to resentence, but remand was not required here; Appellate Court’s order to vacate the greater offense sentence and remand was reversed

Rutledge v. United States, 517 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1996) (Supreme Court decision addressing remedy when both greater and lesser included offenses are convicted)
State v. Polanco, 308 Conn. 242 (Conn. 2013) (held trial court must vacate conviction for lesser included offense rather than merge convictions)
State v. Chicano, 216 Conn. 699 (Conn. 1990) (prior merger approach overruled in part by Polanco)
State v. Miranda, 260 Conn. 93 (Conn. 2002) (discussed aggregate package theory and trial court’s permissive authority to restructure sentences)
State v. Raucci, 21 Conn. App. 557 (Conn. App. 1990) (Appellate Court’s adoption and explanation of aggregate package theory)
State v. Michael A., 297 Conn. 808 (Conn. 2010) (confirmed trial court’s authority to restructure sentence if reviewing court’s judgment altered original sentencing intent)