State of Connecticut v. 291453 (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

Bobby Sullivan, petitioner, entered pleas of guilty to one count of Criminal Attempt at Assault in the First Degree, in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a–49 and 53a–59(a)(5), with a penalty of one to twenty years;  one count of Assault in the First Degree, in violation of General Statutes § 53a–59(a)(5), with a penalty of one to twenty years;  and, one count of Pistol without a Permit, in violation of General Statutes § 29–35(a), with a penalty of one to five years.   The court imposed a total effective sentence of thirty years execution suspended after twenty years to serve with five years probation.   It is this sentence that the petitioner seeks to have reviewed.

The incident was a gang-related shooting which took place in New Haven outside an Adult Education facility.   The victim was engaged in a fistfight with others when the petitioner rode up on a bicycle and shot into the crowd, striking the victim in the back.   The defendant subsequently wrote a letter from jail which indicated that he had shot the wrong person and that he was going to shoot his intended target when released.   The plea agreement had a sentencing range of thirty years execution suspended after twenty years as the maximum sentence and thirty years execution suspended after twelve years as the minimum sentence.

At the hearing before the Division, counsel for petitioner indicated that the sentence should be less because the petitioner was young and immature at the time of the incident and also the victim had recovered completely.   Counsel for the State addressed the Division at the hearing and spoke of the petitioner's gang involvement and the continued threat he posed to the community.   The sentencing court considered all aspects of the record before it in a thorough manner and took into consideration the petitioner's background, his criminal history, and the nature of offense.   The court indicated that the petitioner was “a man without a conscience, a man without morals, and a man who has no value for human life.”  (Transcript at page 10.)

Pursuant to 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.”  Practice Book § 43–28.   The Division is without authority to modify sentences except in accordance with the provisions of Practice Book § 43–23 et seq. and General Statutes § 51–194 et seq.   Taking into consideration these standards for review, the sentence imposed is appropriate and not disproportionate.

The sentence is AFFIRMED.

Alexander, J.

White, J.

Fischer, J.

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

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