*********************************************** 

The “officially released” date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was 

released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions 

and petitions for certification is the “officially released” 

date appearing in the opinion. 

All opinions are subject to modification and technical 

correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut 

Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of 

discrepancies between the advance release version of an 

opinion and the latest version appearing in the Connecticut 

Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports 

or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest version is to 

be considered authoritative. 

The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the 

opinion as it appears in the Connecticut Law Journal and 

bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the 

Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not 

be reproduced and distributed without the express written 

permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. 

*********************************************** 
STATE OF CONNECTICUT v.

ANTHONY E. BROOKS, JR.

(AC 40425)

Lavine, Devlin and Harper, Js.

Syllabus

Convicted of the crimes of criminal possession of a firearm, criminal possession of ammunition, carrying a pistol without a permit, illegal receipt

of a firearm, possession of a weapon in a motor vehicle and interfering

with an officer, the defendant appealed to this court. Held that there

was insufficient evidence to support the defendant’s conviction of illegal

receipt of a firearm; the state did not prove that the defendant was

disqualified from receiving a firearm at the time that he received the

firearm in question, nor did it establish when the defendant came into

possession of the firearm.

Argued September 18—officially released November 12, 2019

Procedural History

Substitute information charging the defendant with

the crimes of criminal possession of a firearm, criminal

possession of ammunition, carrying a pistol without a

permit, stealing a firearm, illegal receipt of a firearm,

illegal possession of a weapon in a motor vehicle and

interfering with an officer, brought to the Superior

Court in the judicial district of Waterbury, geographical

area number four, and tried to a jury before K. Murphy,

J.; thereafter, the court granted the defendant’s motion

for judgment of acquittal as to the count alleging stealing a firearm; verdict and judgment of guilty, from which

the defendant appealed to this court. Reversed in part;

judgment directed.

Judie Marshall, for the appellant (defendant).

Rocco A. Chiarenza, assistant state’s attorney, with

whom, on the brief, were Maureen Platt, state’s attorney, and David A. Gulick, senior assistant state’s attorney, for the appellee (state).
Opinion

DEVLIN, J. The defendant, Anthony E. Brooks, Jr.,

appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after

a jury trial, of illegal receipt of a firearm in violation of

General Statutes § 29-33 (b).1 On appeal, the defendant

asserts that there was insufficient evidence to support

his conviction of that charge because the state did not

prove when or how the defendant received the firearm.

We disagree with the defendant’s argument but conclude, for another reason, that there was insufficient

evidence to support the defendant’s conviction of illegal

receipt of a firearm. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of conviction only on this count and remand this

case with direction to vacate the conviction of this

offense.2

As relevant to this appeal, the jury reasonably could

have found the following facts. On September 9, 2015,

the police attempted to conduct a motor vehicle stop

of the defendant for his failure to obey a stop sign.

After crashing his car and fleeing on foot, the defendant

was confronted by the police and was seen tossing an

object away from him. The police recovered the object,

which proved to be a Remington Arms Model 1911 R1

.45 ACP handgun that had been reported stolen on July

27, 2012.

Following a jury trial, the defendant was convicted

on November 30, 2016 of, inter alia, illegal receipt of a

firearm in violation of § 29-33 (b). The statute provides

in relevant part: ‘‘[N]o person may purchase or receive

any pistol or revolver unless such person holds a valid

permit to carry a pistol or revolver . . . a valid permit

to sell at retail a pistol or revolver . . . or a valid eligibility certificate . . . or is a federal marshal, parole

officer or peace officer.’’ General Statutes § 29-33 (b).3

On appeal, the defendant argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction on this count.

We agree.

Although the parties disagree as to the precise meaning of the word ‘‘receive’’ in § 29-33 (b), both agree that

it means more than mere possession. At trial, the state

proved that on September 9, 2015, when the defendant

was found to be in possession of a firearm, he was

disqualified from receiving a firearm because he was a

convicted felon. The state, however, concedes that it

did not prove that the defendant was disqualified at the

time that he received the firearm, nor did it establish

when the defendant came into possession of the firearm. The state, therefore, further concedes, and we

agree after examining the record, that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the defendant violated

§ 29-33 (b).4

The judgment is reversed only as to the conviction

of illegal receipt of a firearm and the case is remanded

with direction to vacate the defendant’s conviction of
that offense; the judgment is affirmed in all other

respects.

In this opinion the other judges concurred.

1 The defendant was also convicted of criminal possession of a firearm

in violation of General Statutes § 53a-217 (a), criminal possession of ammunition in violation of § 53a-217 (a), carrying a pistol without a permit in violation

of General Statutes § 29-35 (a), illegal possession of a weapon in a motor

vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 29-38 (a), and interfering with a

police officer in violation of General Statutes § 53a-167a (a). These convictions are not affected by this appeal.

2 As our Supreme Court has elaborated, ‘‘[the] principles of judicial economy dictate that, in a case in which the judgment of the reviewing court

does not change the total effective sentence, the reviewing court should not

order the trial court to resentence a defendant on the remaining convictions

unless there is some evidence or some other basis in the record supporting

the conclusion that the judgment of the reviewing court altered the original

sentencing intent.’’ State v. Johnson, 316 Conn. 34, 42–43, 111 A.3d 447

(2015).

Because our decision does not alter the total effective sentence, and

because there is no evidence that our decision would alter the trial court’s

original intent at sentencing, we conclude that the defendant need not

be resentenced.

3 When the state brought charges against the defendant, it charged him

with violating General Statutes § 29-33 (b) by illegally receiving a firearm.

The state did not charge the defendant with illegally purchasing a firearm.

Therefore, we need only address the sufficiency of evidence necessary to

establish illegal receipt of a firearm in violation of § 29-33 (b).

4

In light of the state’s concession that it did not offer sufficient evidence

to prove receipt of a firearm, we see no need to address the issue of the

meaning of ‘‘receive’’ in § 29-33 (b).