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.
Emmanuel Blango v. Warden
DECISION
THE COURT: All right. The Court's prepared to rule. All right. The Court finds that pursuant to Luurtsema versus Warden, 299 Connecticut 740 at 2011, the petitioner is entitled to relief on the claims set the forth in count one and count two of his amended petition dated November 23rd, 2013.
Those claims attack the validity of the petitioner's conviction for kidnapping in the second degree, which entered on March 24th, 2004, in the matter of State versus Blango, docket number CR04–0080961S in the Superior Court for the Judicial District of Tolland.
On July 1st, 2005, the trial court imposed a twenty-one-year sentence of incarceration at five years special parole for the petitioner's violation of General Statutes 53a–94, kidnapping in the second degree.
That sentence also included enhancements pursuant to General Statute 53–202(k) and 53a–40b pursuant to the petitioner's pleas of nolo contendre on the two Part B informations.
Thus, the Court orders that the petitioner's kidnapping conviction and sentence in accordance with that kidnapping conviction of twenty-one years incarceration and five years special parole, as to the kidnapping conviction only, are vacated and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings on the kidnapping.
The Court denies count three, which seeks to vacate the petitioner's nolo contendere pleas to the two Part B informations charging the petitioner with committing the charged offenses while on bond and with a firearm.
These Part B informations apply to all of the charges that the petitioner was facing and all of the convictions, not just the kidnapping charge, and those pleas were entered knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently after a full and thorough canvass by the trial court.
The sentence enhancements related to the kidnapping charge have been vacated by this Court in accordance with the Court's ruling in order on counts one and two. The petitioner has withdrawn count four.
That will be my ruling. I'll ask the monitor to type that up as my ruling in this case, and I'll sign that as my decision. I would ask if anyone has any concerns or comments about that ruling.
ATTY. SULIK: None from the respondent.
THE COURT: Okay.
ATTY. ARMORE: None from the petitioner, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. I'd also want you to know, Mr. Blango, that you have the right to appeal my decision as to count three if you wish. You probably don't have the right as to counts one and two. Since I granted your petition on those, it won't be grieved, but you certainly have the right to do so on count three.
The clerk has just handed your attorney the paperwork necessary if you do in fact wish to appeal. There should be an application for a waiver of fees and costs and appointment of counsel, as well as a petition for certification which to allow you to appeal in this case.
So you can decide with your attorney whether or not you want to do that. He can assist you in filling that out. All right. Is there anything else?
ATTY. ARMORE: And may I say for the record, Your Honor, the Court clerk did hand me the Notice of Appeal Procedures and habeas corpus forms, as well as the application for waiver of fees, costs and expenses and appointment of counsel on appeal.
THE COURT: All right. Good. Now, I understand that you'd like a minute to talk to your client about whether he would like to fill out that paper before he's sent back; is that right?
ATTY. ARMORE: That's correct, Your Honor. It is a very short window of ten days.
THE COURT: Let me ask Vinnie, should he do that downstairs or up here?
THE MARSHAL: How long does it take, counselor?
ATTY. ARMORE: Less than five minutes.
THE MARSHAL: He can do it up here, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. In there or in here?
THE MARSHAL: Right here.
THE COURT: All right. Is there anything else before we adjourn?
ATTY. ARMORE: Not from the petitioner, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. We're adjourned. (Court adjourned.)
Susan Q. Cobb, J.
Cobb, Susan Quinn, J.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: CV114003917
Decided: February 28, 2013
Court: Superior 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)