State v. Kathleen McKinnon-Conneally, 101 A.3d 875

In March 2010 Kathleen McKinnon-Conneally pled nolo contendere to second-degree robbery and received a 10-year sentence with 18 months to serve (stayed pending treatment) and 8.5 years suspended with probation.
The stay on the 18-month term was removed; defendant served time and was released November 30, 2011.
On Dec. 1, 2011 an incident occurred where complainant Carol Riddle was assaulted and robbed; defendant was implicated and arrested on Dec. 19, 2011 for first-degree robbery and conspiracy, and a Rule 32(f) probation-violation notice was filed.
At the combined probation-violation/bail hearing, the court found defendant violated probation by failing to keep the peace; the hearing justice emphasized perceived predatory conduct and that the conduct occurred within 48 hours of release from ACI.
At sentencing the Superior Court executed the entire remaining 8.5 years of the previously suspended sentence. Defendant appealed only the excessiveness of that probation-violation sentence; a subsequent nolo contendere plea to new charges rendered the violation determination moot but left the sentencing question intact.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether executing the full 8.5-year suspended sentence for probation violation was an abuse of discretion / excessive	State: Hearing justice acted within statutory and case-law discretion to execute suspended sentence given nature of prior offense and violation	McKinnon-Conneally: Sentence was excessive; court ignored sentencing benchmark, mental-health diagnoses, and substance-abuse issues	Court affirmed: No abuse of discretion; justice properly considered nature of original offense and similar conduct, and permissibly executed the suspended term

State v. Roberts, 59 A.3d 693 (R.I. 2013) (trial justice has wide discretion in executing suspended sentence on probation violation)
State v. Lancellotta, 35 A.3d 863 (R.I. 2012) (deference to trial justice’s sentencing decisions on probation revocation)
State v. Parson, 844 A.2d 178 (R.I. 2004) (suspended sentence remains contingent on good behavior; may be executed upon violation)
State v. Tucker, 747 A.2d 451 (R.I. 2000) (§ 12-19-9 grants broad latitude to remove suspension in whole or in part)
State v. Pires, 525 A.2d 1313 (R.I. 1987) (primary focus in executing suspended sentence should be nature of the original offense; subsequent conduct may be considered)
State v. Brown, 821 A.2d 695 (R.I. 2003) (revocation of probation results in execution of previously imposed sentence, not imposition of a new sentence)