Legal Opinion

State v. Jumpp

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided February 14, 2017No. AC 38452PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Opinion *757The defendant, Junior Jumpp, appeals from the denial of his motion for sentence modification made pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-39. The defendant has completed the sentence that was the subject of his motion. This court cannot grant the defendant any practical relief, and therefore his appeal is moot. State v. Bradley , 137 Conn.App. 585, 587 n.1, 49 A.3d 297, cert. denied, 307 Conn. 939, 56 A.3d 950 (2012) ; see also State v. Boyle , 287 Conn. 478, 485-86, 949 A.2d 460 (2008) ; State v. Scott , 83 Conn.App. 724, 726-27, 851 A.2d 353 (2004). We also summarily *823reject the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Loisel v. RoweSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
  2. State v. BoyleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
  3. State v. ScottConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
  4. State v. BradleyConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. JumppSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API