State of Connecticut v. 305063 (2014)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

The petitioner is Dan Moore.   He was found guilty after a jury trial of the following:

1.) Three counts of Robbery in the First Degree.

2.) Four counts of Accessory to Robbery in the First Degree.

3.) One count of Conspiracy to Commit Robbery in the First Degree.

The court imposed a total effective sentence of thirty-five years execution suspended after twenty-seven years with five years probation.

The facts are as follows.   On October 6, 2002 seven people were in a parking lot in Windsor when a van pulled up.   Several individuals, including the petitioner, exited the van and pointed a shotgun at the victims and proceeded to rob them of money and personal items.   The van then took off pursued by police in a high speed chase going through four towns before the van stopped.

The petitioner claims his sentence is inappropriate and disproportionate pursuant to Practice Book § 43–28.   He claims the co-defendants entered pleas and received sentences far less than the petitioner.   The petitioner claims he did not plan this robbery and that his sentence was exorbitant.

The state argues this was a very dangerous crime.   A loaded shotgun was pointed at innocent victims.   The petitioner was convicted of an earlier robbery in North Carolina in 1993 and served eight years in jail.

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.   This was a violent robbery where a loaded shotgun was directed at the victims.   The petitioner had previously been sentenced to twenty years (serving eight years) for a robbery in North Carolina.

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

Joan K. Alexander, Judge

James P. Ginocchio, Judge

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

Fischer, Brian T., Alexander, Joan K., Ginocchio, James P., J.s