Opinion
No. CR6-362355
June 16, 2005
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
The petitioner, Maleek Jones, seeks review of the 65-year sentence imposed from the judgment of convictions rendered after a jury trial of murder in violation of General Statutes 53a-54a(2); the trial court imposed a sentence of 60 years incarceration and 53a-8 Conspiracy to Commit Murder in violation of General Statutes 53a-8 and 53a-54a (a; the trial court imposed a 25-year period of incarceration to be served concurrently; and carrying a pistol without a permit in violation of General Statutes 29-35. The trial court imposed a sentence of 5 years to serve consecutively to counts one and two. The total effective sentence imposed, 65 years incarceration.
The following facts gleaned from our Appellate Court decision as reported at 46 Conn.App. 640 are relevant to the resolution of the petitioner's claims.
The petitioner was a member of a group of about eight persons who sold narcotics in the Edgewood Avenue area of New Haven. The group was known by the name Red Line because of the color of the bags they used to sell narcotics. The group used a second-floor apartment on the corner of Chapel and Beers Streets as its base of operations. The apartment was located a short distance from Saint Raphael's Hospital.
The petitioner was involved in a relationship with Teeba Henderson, who had previously had a long-term relationship with Steven Gary. Gary did not take the break up of their relationship well and continued to pursue Henderson. The petitioner and Gary had argued and, subsequently, in April 1992 had a fight in which Gary was knocked unconscious.
There was animosity between the Red Line group and individuals friendly with Gary who lived in the area of Carmel Street. The animosity between the two groups had escalated to the point that members of the Red Line group had gone to Gary's neighborhood, and the groups exchanged gunfire.
On October 14, 1992, at approximately 1:30 a.m., Eddie Harp, a friend of Gary, was driving his station wagon in the vicinity of Saint Raphael's Hospital. Harp pulled the vehicle into the emergency room parking lot and parked in an area reserved for security vehicles. Louis Yanac, a security officer, approached Harp, who informed Yanac that he was visiting Sheila McCray, a hospital employee, during her lunch break. At about 2:10 a.m., as Harp left the hospital driveway, shots were fired, and the vehicle rolled into a parking lot across from the hospital's main entrance.
When the police arrived at the scene, they found Harp's car running with Harp unconscious in the driver's seat. The victim was transported by ambulance to the hospital, where it was found that he had suffered three gunshot wounds, one of which had penetrated his brain, resulting in his death about six hours after the shooting.
Investigation revealed a large number of shots fired at the car, through both the rear window and the driver's window. On the night of the shooting, the petitioner identified the victim's car as belonging to a friend of Gary's from Carmel Street, and he and two friends approached the car all armed with revolvers, Jones firing through the side and rear windows. State v. Maleek, 46 Conn.App. 640.
Counsel for the petitioner contends the sentence is excessive in light of the age of the petitioner and urges the panel to afford the petitioner some hope and modify the sentence imposed.
The state contends the sentence is appropriate in light of the facts of the case which is the brutal killing perpetrated by the petitioner which demands the sentence imposed. Counsel further claims the trial court considered all the relevant factors and the sentence imposed should be affirmed.
Pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book § 43-23 et seq., the Sentence Review Division is limited in the scope of its review. The Division is to determine whether the sentence imposed "should be modified because it is inappropriate or disproportionate in light of the nature of the offense, the character of the offender, the protection of the public interest and the deterrent, rehabilitative, isolative and denunciatory purposes for which the sentence was intended."
The Division is without authority to modify a sentence except in accordance with the provisions of Connecticut Practice Book § 43-23 et seq. and Connecticut General Statutes § 51-195 et seq.
The trial court imposed the maximum sentence and commented "that the jury found that you took the life of Mr. Harp who was entitled to a better fate . . . since you took a life . . ."
The sentence clearly reflects the gravity of the offense and affirms the value society places on human life.
This Court has reviewed with care the record before us and finds that the sentence imposed was neither inappropriate nor disproportionate.
The sentence is AFFIRMED.
Holden, J.
Miano, J.
Espinosa, J.
Holden, J., Miano, J. and Espinosa, J. participated in this decision.