DocketNumber: No. 54671
Citation Numbers: 1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 521
Judges: PURTILL, J. CT Page 521-A KLACZAK, J. STANLEY, J.
Filed Date: 1/10/1997
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/17/2021
Application for review of sentence imposed by the Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford, Docket Number 54671.
Jon L. Schoenhorn, Esq., Defense Counsel, for Petitioner.
Christopher L. Morano, Esq., Assistant State's Attorney, for the State.
BY THE DIVISION:
After trial by jury, petitioner was convicted of Interference with a Search with a Dangerous Weapon in violation of General Statutes §
As a result of such conviction, he was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of ten years on the first count. A consecutive sentence of ten years was imposed on the second count, and a concurrent sentence of one year was imposed on the third count.
A special hearing on petitioner's request for sentence review was held on January 10, 1997. At such hearing, petitioner and the State presented well-reasoned arguments in favor of their respective positions.
A review of the file, including the original application for sentence review, however, reveals that sentence was imposed on December 21, 1989. The application for review was dated CT Page 521-B January 19, 1990, and stamped as having been filed with the clerk on February 16, 1990.
The transcript indicates that after sentence was imposed, the clerk delivered to petitioner the Application for Review of Sentence. The application contains the following warning:
"This application must be completed and filed within thirty (30) days from the date your sentence was imposed . . ."
The application also contains directions as to where it must be filed.
The Sentence Review Division, purely a statutory body, has only such jurisdiction as is conferred upon it by statute. It can act only in compliance with statutory requirements. General Statutes §
Here, sentence was imposed December 21, 1989, and the application was not filed with the clerk until February 16, 1990. Clearly, the application was not filed within the time limited by the statute.
Because the application for review was not filed within the time limited by statute, this division has no authority to consider it. State v. Webb, supra; State v. Jensen,
Accordingly, the petition must be dismissed.
Purtill, J.
Klaczak, J.
Stanley, J.
Purtill, J., Klaczak, J., and Stanley, J. participated in this decision.