State of Connecticut v. 295804 (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

The petitioner is Epifanio Ayala.   On April 1, 2005 he entered a guilty plea to the following changes:

1) Felony Murder in violation of C.G.S. 53a–54c with a penalty of not less than 25 years or more than 60 years.

2) Robbery in the First Degree in violation of C.G.S. 53a–134(a)(1) with a penalty of not less than 1 year or more than 20 years.

3) Kidnapping in the First Degree in violation of C.G.S. 53a–92(a)(2)(b) with a penalty of not less than 10 years and not more than 25 years.

Pursuant to an agreement between the petitioner and the state the trial court would sentence the petitioner to 80 years with the right to argue for less.   The court imposed a total effective sentence of 70 years.   It is this sentence the petitioner seeks to have reviewed.

The facts are as follows.   The defendant along with 3 other co-defendants planned to rob a cab driver to get money.   While in the cab one co-defendant mentions the name of another codefendant and then a decision is made to kill the cab driver.   The cab driver is repeatedly beaten and dies.   His cab is set on fire.

The petitioner claims his sentence is inappropriate and disproportionate pursuant to Practice Book § 43–28.   He claims the sentence was too punitive.   He requests his sentence be reduced as a result of the fact he has no record and he entered a plea.   The petitioner requests a 40–year sentence.

The state argues this was a brutal beating of an innocent man who has two little children and a wife.

Pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book § 43–23 et seq., the Sentence Review Division is limited in the scope of its review.   The Division is to determine whether the sentence imposed “should be modified because it is inappropriate or disproportionate in the light of the nature of the offense, the character of the offender, the protection of the public interest and the deterrent, rehabilitative, isolative and denunciatory purposes for which the sentence was intended.”   The Division is without authority to modify sentences except in accordance with the provisions of Connecticut Practice Book § 43–23 et seq. and Connecticut General Statute § 51–194 et seq.

The Division finds there is nothing inappropriate or disproportionate about the sentence imposed by the trial court in this case.   The court sentenced the petitioner within the parameters the parties agreed to.   The trial court found the defendant participated in a “brutal crime.”

In reviewing the record as a whole, the Division finds that the sentencing court's actions were in accordance with the parameters of Connecticut Practice Book § 43–23 et seq.

The Sentence is Affirmed.

Brian T. Fischer, Judge

Gary White, Judge

Joan K. Alexander, Judge

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

Fischer, Brian T., White, Gary J., Alexander, Joan K., J.s