State v. Saunders, 32758.

• Decision Date: 29 November 2011
• Docket Number: No. 32758.,32758.
• Parties: STATE of Connecticut v. Randall SAUNDERS.
• Court: Connecticut Court of Appeals

132 Conn.App. 268
50 A.3d 321

STATE of Connecticut
v.
Randall SAUNDERS.

No. 32758.

Appellate Court of Connecticut.

Argued Sept. 21, 2011.
Decided Nov. 29, 2011.

[50 A.3d 322]

Randall B. Saunders, pro se, the appellant (defendant).

Raheem L. Mullins, assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, were Stephen J. Sedensky III, state's attorney, and Warren C. Murray, supervisory assistant state's attorney, for the appellee (state).

LAVINE, ROBINSON and LAVERY, Js.

PER CURIAM.

[132 Conn.App. 269]The defendant, Randall Saunders, appeals from the judgment of the trial court, Cobb, J., dismissing his motion to correct an illegal sentence, filed pursuant to Practice Book § 43–22.¹ The dispositive issue on appeal is whether the court properly determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider the defendant's motion. We conclude that the court properly determined that it lacked jurisdiction because the defendant's claim did not fall within the purview of § 43–22. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The following facts and procedural history are relevant to our review of the defendant's appeal. The defendant was arrested on January 26, 1997, and was charged with murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a–54a (a). The initial trial resulted in a mistrial. The state retried the defendant charging him in a substituted long form information with one count of intentional manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a–55a (a) and 53a–55 (a)(1) and reckless manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm in violation of § § 53a–55 (a)(3) and 53a–55a (a). On March 21, 2001, the jury found the defendant not guilty of intentional manslaughter but convicted him of reckless manslaughter. The court rendered judgment in accordance with the verdict and sentenced the defendant to twenty-seven years of incarceration. The defendant appealed his conviction, but it was affirmed by our Supreme Court. See State v. Saunders, 267 Conn. 363, 366, 838 A.2d 186, cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1036, 124 S.Ct. 2113, 158 L.Ed.2d 722 (2004).

[50 A.3d 323]

[132 Conn.App. 270]On August 9, 2010, the defendant filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Practice Book § 43–22. On the same day, the state filed a motion to dismiss the defendant's motion, claiming that the court lacked jurisdiction. On September 14, 2010, a hearing on the motion was held, and the court granted the state's motion to dismiss. In granting the state's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, the trial court wrote, “[f]or the reasons stated in the motion and pursuant to State v. Lawrence, 281 Conn. 147 [913 A.2d 428 (2007) ].” This appeal followed.

The defendant argues that the trial court erred when it granted the state's motion to dismiss on the grounds that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. He claims that his...