Legal Opinion
State v. Carmona
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided November 20, 2007No. AC 28969PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
2Per curiam
In this appeal, the defendant, Nathaniel Carmona, raises important and troubling issues concerning the calculation and application of presentence confinement credit. He appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing his motion to correct an illegal sentence, claiming that the court improperly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the motion. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The following facts as found by the court are not disputed. “On November 30, 2000, the defendant . . . was arrested for sale of narcotics in violation of General Statutes §…
3Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- State v. CasianoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Abed v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Harris v. Commissioner of CorrectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- State v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by11 opinions
- Crawford v. Commissioner of CorrectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- State v. KoslikConnecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- State v. WrightConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
- Borrelli v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- Carmona v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.