State v. Tarasco

3 Citing cases

  1. State v. Riley

    140 Conn. App. 1 (Conn. App. Ct. 2013)   Cited 12 times
    In Riley, it was undisputed that the defendant's sentence of 100 years imprisonment was the functional equivalent to a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

    Under General Statutes § 54–91a, a sentencing court is required to consider the information contained in the presentence investigation report. See also State v. Tarasco, 301 Conn. 103, 107, 22 A.3d 530 (2011) (“it is axiomatic that the trial court must consider during sentencing the information contained in a presentence investigation report”). The state asked the court to impose an effective sentence of 120 years imprisonment because, in its view, the defendant “should never ever be on the streets again.”

  2. State v. Riley

    AC 33506 (Conn. App. Ct. Jan. 1, 2013)

    Under General Statutes § 54-91a, a sentencing court is required to consider the information contained in the presentence investigation report. See also State v. Tarasco, 301 Conn. 103, 107, 22 A.3d 530 (2011) (''it is axiomatic that the trial court must consider during sentencing the information contained in a presentence investigation report''). The state asked the court to impose an effective sentence of 120 years imprisonment because, in its view, the defendant ''should never ever be on the streets again.

  3. Tarasco v. Warden

    CV164007645 (Conn. Super. Ct. Jun. 28, 2019)

    The victim quickly began arguing with the defendant’s party, and, shortly thereafter, the defendant shot him, mortally wounding him." State v. Tarasco, 301 Conn. 103, 104, 22 A.3d 530, 531-32 (2011). On August 11, 2008, the petitioner was sentenced to 50 years incarceration.