State of Connecticut v. 273457 (2013)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

Ronald James, petitioner, was convicted after a jury trial of two counts of Assault in the First Degree, in violation of General Statutes § 53a–59(a)(5), each with a penalty of one to twenty years;  and, one count of Conspiracy to Commit Assault in the First Degree, in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a–48 and 53a–59(a)(5), with a penalty of one to twenty years.   The court imposed a total effective sentence of forty-one years to serve.   It is this sentence that the petitioner seeks to have reviewed.

The incident was a shooting in New Haven.   The two victims were in an apartment when multiple shots were fired.   The male victim was shot in the chest and the female victim was shot in her legs.

At the hearing before the Division, counsel for the petitioner indicated that the sentence was excessive.   Counsel requested that the sentence be reduced due to the disparity between the petitioner's sentence and that of his co-defendant.   The petitioner addressed the Division and stated that he was not violent and that the evidence against him was not truthful.   Counsel for the State addressed the Division and described the petitioner's criminal record.   The State argued that the petitioner was a high risk offender.   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 dangerous recidivist.”  (Transcript at page 23.)

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.

Joan K. Alexander, J.

James P. Ginnochio, J.

Brian T. Fischer, J.

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

Alexander, Joan K., Fischer, Brian, T., Ginocchio, James P., Js. participated in this decision.