State of Connecticut 1 v. 309304 (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

The petitioner, Roshun Jones, was convicted by a jury of reckless assault in the third degree,² two counts of misconduct with a motor vehicle,³ reckless driving ⁴ and illegal racing.⁵  The trial court sentenced the offender to a total effective sentence of 12 years in prison.   The petitioner appealed his conviction, but the trial court decision was affirmed.   See State v. Jones, 92 Conn.App. 1, aff'd (2005).

The factual basis underlying the petitioner's conviction is detailed in the aforementioned Appellate Court decision.   For purposes of this Sentence Review decision, however, it is sufficient to state the facts as follows.   On September 23, 1999 at about 5:30 p.m., the petitioner was operating a car in the Jewett City area and began racing with a second car that he encountered on a two-lane highway.   The second vehicle was occupied by the driver and a passenger.

During the course of the race the two cars reached speeds exceeding 100 m.p.h. and the second vehicle ultimately collided with a motorcycle that was also on the highway.   The passenger in the second vehicle and a passenger who was on the motorcycle were both killed in the accident.   In addition, the operator of the motorcycle suffered such a severe injury to his left leg that it had to be amputated.

The petitioner and a passenger who was with him in the car drove away from the wreckage, but later were forced to stop because the petitioner incurred a flat tire.   The petitioner and his companion then walked back to the scene and the petitioner was subsequently arrested.

The petitioner asks the Division to reduce his sentence by four years, making it a total effective sentence of 8 years to serve.   He claims that the sentence he requests is the “average” sentence served by persons who are convicted by the type of offense that he committed and that the sentence he received, being higher than the average, is therefore “inappropriate” or “disproportionate” pursuant to Practice Book Section 43-28.⁶

The state strongly opposes any reduction in the sentence.   It points out that the petitioner had a history of speeding violations prior to his involvement in this incident and even had a speeding violation between the time of the incident and the date he was sentenced.   Further, it argues that the petitioner has denied responsibility for his reckless conduct;  has failed to show any genuine remorse for the carnage that he created;  has a history of behavioral problems;  and has caused terrible suffering for the families of the decedents and for the victim who lost his leg.

The Division only has authority to modify a criminal sentence if it is inappropriate or disproportionate within the meaning of Section 43-28.   The sentence imposed by the trial court is both appropriate and proportionate in light of the severity of the misconduct, the nature of the harm done to the victims and the failure of the petitioner to accept responsibility for his criminal behavior.   The petitioner has a history of violating the motor vehicle laws of this state both before and after he committed his crime.   There is no good reason to reduce the sentence imposed by the trial court.

The sentence is AFFIRMED.

White, J., Iannotti, J., Alexander, J.

White, J., Iannotti, J. and Alexander, J. participated in this decision.

FOOTNOTES

FN2. See General Statutes Section 53a-61(a)(3).   This offence carries a mandatory one-year jail sentence..  FN2. See General Statutes Section 53a-61(a)(3).   This offence carries a mandatory one-year jail sentence.

FN3. See General Statutes Section 53a-57.   This offence carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison..  FN3. See General Statutes Section 53a-57.   This offence carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.

FN4. See General Statutes Section 14-222(a).   This offence carries a maximum of one year in jail when, as in this case, the defender is convicted as a subsequent offender..  FN4. See General Statutes Section 14-222(a).   This offence carries a maximum of one year in jail when, as in this case, the defender is convicted as a subsequent offender.

FN5. See General Statutes Section 14-224.   This offence carries a maximum of one year in jail..  FN5. See General Statutes Section 14-224.   This offence carries a maximum of one year in jail.

FN6. Section 43-28 indicates that the Division shall “determine whether the sentence should be modified because it is inappropriate or disproportionate in light of the nature of the offense, the character of the offender, the protection of the public interest, the deterrent, rehabilitative, isolative, and denunciatory purposes for which the sentence was intended.”.  FN6. Section 43-28 indicates that the Division shall “determine whether the sentence should be modified because it is inappropriate or disproportionate in light of the nature of the offense, the character of the offender, the protection of the public interest, the deterrent, rehabilitative, isolative, and denunciatory purposes for which the sentence was intended.”

White, Gary J., Iannotti, Frank A., Alexander, Joan K., J.s