State v. Danforth
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of robbery in the first degree as an accessory and conspiracy to commit robbery in the first degree. The jury further found that a firearm had been used in the commission of the robbery, and therefore, the trial court concluded that Defendant was subject to a sentence enhancement under Conn. Gen. Stat. 53-202k, which provides for a mandatory term of imprisonment when a person uses, or is armed with and threatens to use, a firearm in the commission of a felony. Defendant was unarmed when the robbery occurred. On appeal, Defendant argued, among other things, that she was not subject to sentence enhancement under section 53-202k because that provision should be construed to apply only to persons who either use a firearm in the commission of the offense or intend that another participant in the offense do so. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the evidence was sufficient to support Defendant’s convictions; (2) in light of the Court’s decision in State v. Flemke, decided today, Defendant was subject to sentence enhancement under section 53-202k; and (3) the trial court properly instructed the jury regarding the state’s burden of proof.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.