State v. Lawrence
Connecticut Appellate Court
1DissentDranginis, J.
I disagree with the majority that the trial court had jurisdiction, pursuant to a motion to correct an illegal sentence, to consider the claim by the defendant, Tarrance Lawrence, that he was improperly convicted under the wrong statute. I therefore respectfully dissent.
The majority correctly sets forth some of the case law interpreting Practice Book § 43-22, which provides *796procedural authority by which a court may correct an illegal sentence. I agree with the majority that it is pursuant to this rule of practice that a defendant may attack the legality of his sentence or the legality of the…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Hill v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Bozza v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- In Re BonnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Murphy v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- United States v. Novenda L. CookCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1989
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.