State of Connecticut v. Robert G. Denya

Summary

The court held that the trial court's later order properly clarified, rather than modified, the defendant's probation condition requiring electronic monitoring. The oral probation ruling controlled over the clerk-prepared written order, and the trial court reasonably interpreted the ambiguous oral ruling as requiring continuous monitoring throughout probation while leaving the monitoring method to probation officials. Because the order was a clarification, the statutory good-cause requirement for modifying probation conditions did not apply, and the Appellate Court's judgment was reversed.