State v. Moore, 141 Conn. App. 814

Moore robbed the New Alliance Bank in Columbia, CT on July 13, 2009, delivering a note that stated 'Give cash. I have gun' and demanding cash.
Tellers complied with Moore’s demand; no firearm was found on Moore or at the scene, but cash ($3,500–$3,600) was recovered.
A jury convicted Moore of (i) robbery in the first degree under § 53a-134(a)(4) and (ii) a class B felony with a firearm under § 53-202k.
Moore also stipulated to committing those offenses while on release under § 53a-40b and pleaded guilty to being a persistent felony offender under § 53a-40(f).
The court found the offenses occurred while on release and sentenced Moore to a total term of 34 years’ imprisonment.
On appeal, Moore challenges (1) the sufficiency of the evidence to prove he threatened a firearm and (2) the sentence enhancement under § 53a-40(f) as violating Apprendi and its progeny.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to prove firearm threat	Moore argues no firearm was represented or displayed.	State failed to prove he threatened a firearm to sustain § 53a-134(a)(4) and § 53-202k.	Sufficiency supported; reasonable view supports firearm threat finding
Apprendi/Golding challenge to § 53a-40(f) enhancement	Golding review permits consideration of constitutional claims not preserved below.	No violation; guilty plea to § 53a-40(f) waives right to jury findings on enhancement.	Waiver via guilty plea; no constitutional violation shown; judgment affirmed

State v. Hawthorne, 175 Conn. 569 (1978) (firearm possession not required for 53a-134(a)(4))
State v. Dolphin, 195 Conn. 444 (1985) (robbery conviction can rely on threat/representation of weapon)
State v. Tomlin, 266 Conn. 608 (2003) (applies to manslaughter with firearm; distinguishable from robbery statute)
State v. Bradley, 39 Conn. App. 82 (1995) (possession of operable firearm not necessary for § 53a-134(a)(4))
State v. Michael A., 297 Conn. 808 (2010) (plea to § 53a-40(f) waives jury findings on enhancement)
State v. Velasco, 253 Conn. 210 (2000) (plea to persistent offender waives jury determination on ultimate facts)
State v. Reynolds, 126 Conn. App. 291 (2011) (Golding review appropriate when constitutional magnitude claimed)
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (any factor increasing maximum sentence must be proven to a jury)
Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004) (statutory maximum is what jury verdict or defendant’s admission permits)
State v. Walker, 90 Conn. App. 737 (2005) (Apprendi governs enhancements beyond verdict, with emphasis on jury findings)
State v. Brown, 259 Conn. 799 (2002) (53-202k proof may rely on representations without actual firearm)