State of Connecticut v. 371579 (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

The petitioner is Joel Dort. He was convicted by a jury of Burglary in the First Degree in Violation of C.G.S 53a–101(a)(2) with a penalty of up to twenty years and Kidnapping in the First Degree in violation of 53a–92a with a penalty of up to twenty-five years.   The court sentenced the petitioner to a total effective sentence of ten years followed by seven years of special parole.   It is from this sentence the petitioner seeks review.

The facts are as follows.   On October 2, 2009 the petitioner went to his former employer and threatened her and other employees with a gun.   The petitioner had been fired on June 2009.   He specifically confronted his former supervisor by ripping out the phone cord and pointing the gun at her.

The petitioner claims his sentence is inappropriate and disproportionate pursuant to Practice Book § 43–28.   The petitioner's attorney argues this case is about mental health issues.   The petitioner has no criminal record.   Counsel argues that five years to serve with seven years special parole is an appropriate sentence.

The state argues the sentence is fair and reasonable.   The victim was traumatized by this crime.   The defendant had been fired four months prior to this attack with a gun.

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 petitioner committed an intentional act of extreme violence as the trial court noted.   The victim was terrorized.

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.

The Sentence is Affirmed.

Brian T. Fischer, Judge

Gary J. White, Judge

Joan K. Alexander, Judge

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

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