State v. Kevalis, 313 Conn. 590

Justin T. Kevalis applied for and was accepted into Connecticut’s pretrial accelerated rehabilitation program under Gen. Stat. § 54-56e with respect to an interfering-with-an-officer charge; the court continued the case and set a probationary period up to two years.
Between acceptance and final entry into the program the defendant had multiple arrests from earlier conduct; while on accelerated rehabilitation probation he was convicted (pleaded guilty) of several offenses arising from pre-acceptance conduct, and later pleaded guilty to an out-of-state assault.
After the probationary period, Kevalis moved to dismiss the original interfering-with-an-officer charge, arguing he had satisfactorily completed the program and that convictions based on pre-program conduct should not count toward unsatisfactory completion (analogizing to postconviction probation rules).
The state sought a finding of unsuccessful completion, arguing convictions obtained while participating in the program defeat the statute’s purpose of preserving a clean record.
The trial court denied the motion, concluding that any conviction during participation in the program—regardless of when the conduct occurred—precludes satisfactory completion because the statute’s purpose is to give first-time/nonrecorded offenders a clean slate.
The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that a conviction obtained during the program undermines § 54-56e’s purpose and requires a finding of unsatisfactory completion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Kevalis)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether a conviction entered while a defendant is participating in accelerated rehabilitation can be considered in determining satisfactory completion when the underlying conduct predated program entry	Rules governing violations of postconviction probation should apply; pre-program conduct leading to conviction cannot be used to deny satisfactory completion	Convictions obtained during participation defeat the program’s purpose of preserving a clean record and thus require a finding of unsuccessful completion	The court held convictions entered during the program—regardless of when the conduct occurred—preclude satisfactory completion and justify denial of dismissal under § 54-56e

State v. Thompson, 307 Conn. 567 (2012) (plenary review governs statutory construction)
State v. Ward, 306 Conn. 698 (2012) (statutory construction principles and presumption against superfluous language)
State v. Smith, 207 Conn. 152 (1988) (postconviction probation as penal alternative to incarceration)
State v. Parker, 194 Conn. 650 (1984) (treated earlier on final-judgment/appeal issues for accelerated rehabilitation)
State v. Davis, 229 Conn. 285 (1994) (due process protections for probation revocation)
State v. Deptula, 34 Conn. App. 1 (1994) (violation of probation occurs only after probation commences)
State v. Tucker, 219 Conn. 752 (1991) (certain postconviction probation statutes may apply in accelerated rehabilitation context in limited circumstances)