State of Connecticut v. 393015 (2013)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

The petitioner is Rosa Lopez–Rodriquez.   The petitioner entered a guilty plea to Conspiracy to Commit Robbery in the First Degree and Failure to Appear in the First Degree.   The petitioner and the state agreed to a sentence as follows, ten years execution suspended after four years with a right to argue for a lesser sentence.

The petitioner was sentenced to ten years suspended after the service of three years.   It is from this sentence the petitioner seeks review.

The facts are as follows.   The petitioner and an accomplice planned and executed a robbery at a Laundromat in Hartford on October 21, 2011.   The accomplice had a mask on and pointed a gun at the owner.   The accomplice took the owner's money bag.   The petitioner was the get-away driver who was a disgruntled employee of the owner.

The petitioner claims his sentence is inappropriate and disproportionate pursuant to Practice Book § 43–28.   She argues her co-defendant was the one who actually carried through with the robbery.   She requests a sentence of one year and apologized to the panel for her involvement in this crime.

The state argues the judge sentenced the petitioner within the parameters of the agreed recommendations.   The state argues the petitioner was the one who planned this robbery as she had the inside information on the owner and access to the proceeds.

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 was sentenced within the cap structure she agreed to.   She violated the trust of the owner when she planned and executed this robbery.

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

James Ginocchio, Judge

Arthur C. Hadden, Judge

Fischer, J., Ginocchio, J., and Hadden, J. participated in this decision.

Fischer, Brian T., Ginocchio, James P., Hadden, Arthur, C., Js.