A person convicted of an offense committed while released pursuant to sections
54-63a to
54-63g, inclusive, or sections
54-64a to
54-64c, inclusive, other than a violation of section
53a-222 or
53a-222a, may be sentenced, in addition to the sentence prescribed for the offense to (1) a term of imprisonment of not more than ten years if the offense is a felony, or (2) a term of imprisonment of not more than one year if the offense is a misdemeanor.
(P.A. 90-213, S. 54; P.A. 98-90, S. 2; P.A. 10-36, S. 21.)
History: P.A. 98-90 excepted convictions under Sec. 53a-222 from provisions of section; P.A. 10-36 excepted convictions under Sec. 53a-222a from provisions of section, effective July 1, 2010.
Question of whether defendant was on release at time of the offense for which he was convicted and therefore subject to enhanced penalty was not reasonably in dispute, was conceded as fact by defendant, and did not require a jury determination. 280 C. 69. Although the state may not use the erased records to prove the basis for the sentence enhancement, the erasure provisions of Sec. 54-142a do not prohibit the imposition of a sentence enhancement pursuant to this section after the records pertaining to the charges for which defendant was on pretrial release have been erased. 319 C. 494.
Jury hearing not constitutionally required for enhanced sentence based on prior conviction; enhanced penalty provisions do apply to defendant who committed second crime while released on written promise to appear. 62 CA 34. Trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider defendant's claim that sentencing court failed to articulate any reason for enhancing his sentence. 93 CA 61.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
41
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2021 · leading case:
State v. Fagan, 905 A.2d 1101 (Conn. 2006).
State v. Fagan, 905 A.2d 1101 (Conn. 2006).
· cites it 80× “In addition, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly enhanced, pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-40b, [4] his sentence for violating § 14-223(b).”
State v. Henderson, 888 A.2d 132 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006).
· cites it 17× “’ ” On the basis of our review of the record, we are persuaded that the defendant’s claim is utterly meritless.”
State v. Blango, 927 A.2d 964 (Conn. App. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 11× “as a result of prosecutorial impropriety; 5 (3) the court’s jury instructions improperly diluted or shifted the state’s burden to prove compulsion, thereby depriving him of a fair trial; (4) the court improperly admitted constancy of accusation evidence as substantive evidence…”
State v. Jordan, 42 A.3d 457 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012).
· cites it 12× “ior misconduct, (2) there was insufficient evidence to support the tampering conviction, (3) there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction of attempt to commit robbery in the third degree and conspiracy to commit robbery in the third degree, (4) he was deprived of a…”
State v. Sanko, 771 A.2d 149 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001).
· cites it 8× “to 1997) § 53a-40b. 1 In the underlying criminal proceeding, the court accepted a jury verdict finding the defendant guilty of, inter alia, two counts of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle.”
Henderson v. Comm'r of Corr., 835 A.2d 1036 (Conn. App. Ct. 2003).
· cites it 12× “General Statutes § 53a-40b provides that “[a] person convicted of an offense committed while released pursuant to sections 54-63a to 54-63g, inclusive, or sections 54-64a to 54-64c, inclusive, other than a violation of section 53a-222, may be sentenced, in addition to the…”
State v. Myers, 963 A.2d 11 (Conn. 2009).
· cites it 3× “After the juiy returned a guilty verdict on the underlying charges, the court “instructed the clerk to put [Fagan] to plea on part B of the information .”
State v. Martinez, 900 A.2d 485 (Conn. 2006).
· cites it 5× “In the second part of the information, the state also charged the defendant with one count of commission of an offense while released on bond in violation of General Statutes § 53a-40b. 11 Thereafter, the case was *604 tried to the jury, which returned a verdict of guilty on all…”
State v. Elson, 9 A.3d 731 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 4× “[1] Also, as alleged in *734 a part B information, the trial court found the defendant guilty of committing an offense while on pretrial release in violation of General Statutes § 53a-40b (1). On December 10, 2008, the defendant's direct appeal was argued before a panel of three…”
State v. Crawley, 50 A.3d 349 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012).
· cites it 5× “Pursuant to a part B information, the court found that the defendant committed the offenses related to the second case while on release, thereby subjecting him to a sentence enhancement pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-40b.”
State v. Elson, 975 A.2d 678 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009).
· cites it 4× “1 The trial court also found the defendant guilty of committing an offense while on pretrial release in violation of General Statutes § 53a-40b (1), as alleged in a part B information.”
State v. Apt, 78 A.3d 249 (Conn. App. Ct. 2013).
· cites it 8× “The principal issue in this case is whether a court can enhance a defendant’s sentence for committing a crime while released on bond pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-40b 2 when, prior to the sentencing, the records relating to the arrests that led to the defendant’s release on…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-40b(1) — 1 case
State v. Elson, 975 A.2d 678 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009).
“1 The trial court also found the defendant guilty of committing an offense while on pretrial release in violation of General Statutes § 53a-40b (1), as alleged in a part B information.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.