132 Conn. App. 268
Conn. App. Ct.2011Background
- Saunders was convicted of reckless manslaughter with a firearm and sentenced to 27 years, affirmed on appeal.
- On August 9, 2010 Saunders filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence under Practice Book § 43-22.
- The State moved to dismiss the motion for lack of jurisdiction on the same day.
- A hearing was held on September 14, 2010, and the court dismissed the motion citing lack of jurisdiction under State v. Lawrence.
- Saunders argued the sentence was illegal due to an inoperable statute, internal contradictions, and reliance on misinformation.
- The appellate question is whether § 43-22 provides a jurisdictional basis to challenge Saunders’ underlying conviction rather than the sentence itself.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court had subject-matter jurisdiction under § 43-22. | Saunders contends § 43-22 authorizes correcting an illegal sentence. | Saunders argues the sentence is illegal due to statute inoperability and misapplication. | No jurisdiction; § 43-22 does not cover challenges to the conviction itself. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Lawrence, 281 Conn. 147 (2007) (limits § 43-22 to four sentencing/constitutional contexts)
- State v. Motto, 63 Conn. App. 487 (2001) (§ 43-22 relief requires a valid conviction)
- State v. Lewis, 108 Conn. App. 486 (2008) (motions under § 43-22 are proper for illegal sentence only)