State v. Lee, 325 Conn. 339

Defendant David E. Lee was tried and convicted in a consolidated trial on multiple counts arising from a motor vehicle incident and a false affidavit; two convictions at issue were for conspiracy to make a false statement in the second degree and conspiracy to fabricate physical evidence, both based on a single unlawful agreement.
The trial court sentenced Lee to an aggregate effective term; one conspiracy count later became the focus of appeal on double jeopardy grounds.
On appeal the Appellate Court concluded the two conspiracy convictions violated double jeopardy and—relying on State v. Chicano—directed merger of the lesser conspiracy into the greater, vacated the lesser sentence, and ordered resentencing.
While Lee’s petition for certification was pending, this court decided State v. Polanco and State v. Wright, holding that vacatur (not merger) is the proper remedy for certain double jeopardy violations, including multiple conspiracy convictions arising from a single agreement.
This court granted certification, reconsidered the remedy in light of Wright, and ordered vacatur of the conviction and sentence for conspiracy to make a false statement in the second degree and remand for resentencing on the remaining convictions.

Issue	State's Argument	Lee's Argument	Held
Whether convictions on two conspiracy counts based on a single unlawful agreement violate double jeopardy	Agreed the dual convictions violated double jeopardy	Argued the two conspiracy convictions arising from one agreement violate double jeopardy	Court (Appellate Court and this Court) agreed they violate double jeopardy
Proper remedy for dual conspiracy convictions (merger vs. vacatur)	Initially agreed with merger (Appellate Court applied Chicano) but later recognized Wright requires vacatur	Argued for vacatur of the lesser conviction (citing Rutledge)	This Court held vacatur of the lesser conspiracy conviction is the proper remedy under Wright
Whether prior Appellate Court remedy remains correct after Wright	Appellate Court bound by Chicano at the time and properly ordered merger	Lee argued Wright requires vacatur and resentencing	This Court reversed that part and ordered vacatur consistent with Wright
Remand instructions to trial court	Follow Appellate Court’s merger-based remand	Remand for vacatur of lesser conviction and resentencing on remaining counts	Court remanded to vacate the lesser conspiracy conviction and resentence under aggregate sentencing theory

State v. Wright, 320 Conn. 781 (Conn. 2016) (vacatur is proper remedy for multiple conspiracy convictions based on a single unlawful agreement)
State v. Polanco, 308 Conn. 242 (Conn. 2013) (vacatur is proper remedy for greater-and-lesser included offense convictions)
State v. Chicano, 216 Conn. 699 (Conn. 1990) (pre-Wright authority requiring merger as remedy for consecutive convictions)
Rutledge v. United States, 517 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1996) (discusses vacatur as remedy when convictions cannot stand together)
State v. Wade, 297 Conn. 262 (Conn. 2010) (trial court must fashion a new sentence on remaining counts to implement original sentencing intent)