Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

State v. Sinchak, 229 Conn. App. 38 (2024)

Citation
State v. Sinchak, 229 Conn. App. 38 (2024)
Parent Document
State v. Sinchak, 229 Conn. App. 38 (2024)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2024-11-05

Full Text

2,317 chars
denying the state’s motion for permission to appeal
       from that decision because the defendant has not yet
       been resentenced. The defendant moved to dismiss the
       appeal because it is not from a final judgment. The state
       claims that the orders are immediately appealable. We
       disagree with the state and, therefore, we have granted
       the defendant’s motion to dismiss.1
          The record reveals the following relevant facts and
       procedural history. On April 21, 1995, following a jury
       trial, the court accepted a verdict of guilty of one count
       of murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54a,
       and two counts of kidnapping in the first degree in
       violation of General Statutes § 53a-92 (a) (2) (B).
          On July 20, 1995, the court, Murray, J., conducted a
       sentencing hearing. Of relevance to the present matter,
       the transcript reflects that, during the hearing, defense
       counsel did not make any advocacy statement whatso-
       ever on behalf of the defendant. Instead, defense coun-
       sel stated, ‘‘I’m handing the court a handwritten state-
       ment of the defendant regarding the—for the jury
       verdict case, and we have no other comments as far as
       sentencing is concerned.’’ The state and the victim’s
       family advocated for their sentencing recommenda-
       tions, spanning ten pages of the transcript. Defense
       counsel responded, ‘‘I have no comment.’’ The court
       sentenced the defendant to sixty years of incarceration
       for the murder and eighteen years of incarceration on
       each of the two counts of kidnapping, to run consecu-
       tively, for a total effective sentence of ninety-six years
       of incarceration. This court affirmed the judgment of
       conviction in 1997, and our Supreme Court granted
       certification to appeal, but subsequently dismissed the
       appeal as improvidently granted. State v. Sinchak, 47
         1
           On September 4, 2024, this court granted the defendant’s motion to
       dismiss the appeal and indicated that an opinion would follow. This opinion
       explains the reasons for our determination.
Page 2                         CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL                                     0, 0