State v. Victor O., 320 Conn. 239

Defendant Victor O. was convicted of first-degree sexual assault (among other counts) and originally sentenced to a total effective term of 30 years (execution suspended after 15) with 20 years probation.
On direct appeal this Court remanded for resentencing because the trial court had imposed probation for a conviction that, as the state conceded below, could not receive probation when the offense was a class A felony.
On resentencing the court imposed a 12-year term for the sexual assault count; the defendant’s overall effective sentence remained 30 years (execution suspended after 15) with 20 years probation.
The defendant filed a motion to correct an allegedly illegal sentence, arguing § 53a-70(b)(3) requires imposition of a period of special parole (not probation) and that any required special parole must be deducted from his original prison term, reducing time to serve.
The trial court denied relief, concluding § 53a-70(b)(3) does not mandate special parole in every case but establishes a minimum combined term when imprisonment plus special parole is imposed; the trial court’s statutory construction harmonized § 53a-70(b)(3) with the wider sentencing scheme.
This appeal challenges that statutory interpretation; the Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s denial.

Issue	Victor O.'s Argument	State's Argument	Held
Does § 53a-70(b)(3) require imposition of special parole for all first-degree sexual assault convictions?	The statute’s plain language requires imprisonment plus a period of special parole for every conviction.	The clause is a mandatory minimum only if the court imposes imprisonment plus special parole; it does not compel special parole in all cases.	Held: § 53a-70(b)(3) does not mandate special parole in every case; it requires that if imprisonment and special parole are imposed, the combined term be at least ten years.
Must the resentencing have deducted any statutorily required special parole from the defendant’s original total effective prison term?	Because parole is an extension of incarceration and total effective sentence cannot be increased on resentencing, any mandated special parole must reduce original prison time.	No statutory basis to deduct; § 53a-70(b)(3) didn’t mandate special parole here.	Held: No deduction required because § 53a-70(b)(3) did not mandate special parole and the sentence was not illegal on that ground.

State v. Victor O., 301 Conn. 163 (Conn. 2011) (remanded for resentencing after state conceded sentence improperly included probation for a class A felony)
State v. Tabone, 292 Conn. 417 (Conn. 2009) (interpreting special parole statute and holding combined imprisonment and special parole cannot exceed maximum authorized incarceration)
State v. Kelly, 256 Conn. 23 (Conn. 2001) (discussing legislative amendment increasing minimum probation/supervision for sexual offenders)