Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
STATE of Connecticut v. Khari MILLER.
The self-represented defendant, Khari Miller, appeals from the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly found that felony murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a–54c is a class A felony, rather than an unclassified felony.1 We are not persuaded.
We thoroughly have reviewed the record and briefs in this case and have considered the relevant legal principles. Contrary to the defendant's claim that felony murder is appropriately characterized as an unclassified felony, our case law makes clear that “felony murder is simply one form of the crime of murder.” State v. Cross, 127 Conn.App. 718, 721, 14 A.3d 1082, cert. denied, 301 Conn. 918, 21 A.3d 464 (2011); see also State v. John, 210 Conn. 652, 696, 557 A.2d 93 (in enacting felony murder statute, “the legislature intended to specify another manner in which the crime of murder could be committed, rather than create a new crime”), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 824, 110 S.Ct. 84, 107 L.Ed.2d 50 (1989).2 Moreover, although the defendant asserts that “[t]reating the crime of felony murder as a class A murder and sentencing [him] in accordance with [General Statutes] § 53a–35a (2) is and/or would be against the intent of the legislature,” our Supreme Court has explicitly stated that General Statutes §§ 53a–54a (c) and 53a–35a (2) are the “related penalty provisions”; State v. Greco, 216 Conn. 282, 293–94, 579 A.2d 84 (1990); to the felony murder statute and provide that felony murder is punishable as a class A felony by “a prison term of at least twenty-five years and not more than life․” Id., at 295 and n. 13, 579 A.2d 84. Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court properly denied the defendant's motion to correct.
The judgment is affirmed.
FOOTNOTES
1. The defendant was convicted of felony murder in violation of § 53a–54c, robbery in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a–134 (a)(2), and conspiracy to commit robbery in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a134 (a)(2) and 53a–48. The court sentenced the defendant to forty-five years of incarceration on the felony murder count and fifteenyears of incarceration on each of the other counts, to run concurrently, for a total effective sentence of forty-five years imprisonment, consecutive to any sentence in any other case. In his motion to correct and again on appeal, the defendant has asserted that felony murder is an uncla ssified felony, or alternatively, a class A felony other than murder, for which a forty-five year sentence is not statutorily authorized.
2. Indeed, as the court recognized in denying the defendant's motion to correct, both § 53a–54c, the felony murder statute, and § 53a–54a, the intentional murder statute, begin by stating: “[A] person is guilty of murder when․” (Emphasis added).
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 34178.
Decided: February 05, 2013
Court: Appellate Court of Connecticut.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)