O F F I C E O F L E G I S L A T I V E R E S E A R C H
P U B L I C A C T S U M M A R Y
Page 1
PA 21-4—sHB 6462
Judiciary Committee
AN ACT CONCERNING US E OF FORCE BY A PEACE OFFICER
SUMMARY: This act delays the effective date of 2020 legislative changes
regarding the use of force by law enforcement officers (see BACKGROUND)
from April 1, 2021, to January 1, 2022 (PA 20-1, July Special Session (JSS), §
29). Among other things, these provisions (1) limit the circumstances under which
a law enforcement officer’s use of deadly physical force is justified and establish
factors to consider when evaluating whether the officer’s action was reasonable
and (2) limit when officers may use chokeholds or similar restraints (see
BACKGROUND).
The act also modifies the circumstances in which officers are justified in using
deadly physical force as established under PA 20-1, JSS, § 29, by, among other
things:
1. basing the objective reasonableness standard on the officer’s given
circumstances at that time;
2. requiring officers to have reasonably determined that no reasonable
alternatives exist, rather than having exhausted such alternatives, if using
deadly force when making an arrest or preventing escape; and
3. establishing the condition that the escaping person poses a significant
threat of death or serious physical injury to others, among other
requirements.
It also makes technical and conforming changes.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 31, 2021, for the effective date postponement and
January 1, 2022, for the provision modifying the use of deadly force justification.
USE OF DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE
Objective Reasonableness Standard
Under PA 20-1, JSS, § 29, one condition that justifies an officer’s use of
deadly physical force is that the officer’s actions are objectively reasonable under
the circumstances. This act specifies that the actions must be objectively
reasonable given the circumstances at that time.
PA 20-1, JSS, § 29, unchanged by the act, allows officers to use deadly
physical force to:
1. defend themselves or a third person from the use or imminent use of
deadly physical force or
2. (a) arrest a person they reasonably believe has committed or attempted to
commit a felony that involved the infliction of serious physical injury or
(b) prevent the escape from custody of a person they reasonably believe O L R P U B L I C A C T S U M M A R Y
Page 2 of 3
has committed a felony that involved the infliction of serious physical
injury.
As under existing law, officers must reasonably believe the use of force is
necessary.
Making an Arrest or Preventing Escape
In situations where an officer is making an arrest or preventing an escape, PA
20-1, JSS, § 29, places additional conditions on when deadly physical force may
be used. This act modifies these conditions as follows.
It eliminates the requirement for officers to exhaust reasonable alternatives to
the use of deadly force; instead, it requires that they reasonably determine that
there are no available reasonable alternatives to using deadly force. Additionally,
the act requires that they reasonably believe the force they used does not create
unreasonable, rather than substantial, risk to a third party.
Preventing Escape. In situations where an officer is preventing an escape, the
act additionally establishes the condition that, to justify an officer’s use of deadly
force, the escaping person must pose a significant threat of death or serious
physical injury to others.
DETERMINING WHETHER DEA DLY FORCE WAS REASON ABLE
PA 20-1, JSS, § 29, established factors for evaluating whether an officer’s use
of deadly physical force was objectively reasonable. These factors included,
among others, whether the officer’s conduct led to an increased risk of the
situation that preceded the use of force. This act narrows this factor to whether the
officer’s unreasonable conduct led to such an increased risk.
BACKGROUND
Law Enforcement Officers
For purposes of the act, a law enforcement officer includes peace officers (see
below), special police officers for the Department of Revenue Services, and
authorized officials of the Department of Correction (DOC) or the Board of
Pardons and Paroles. By law, the following individuals are designated peace
officers: state and local police, Division of Criminal Justice inspectors, state
marshals exercising statutory powers, judicial marshals performing their duties,
conservation or special conservation officers, constables who perform criminal
law enforcement duties, appointed special policemen, adult probation officers,
DOC officials authorized to make arrests in a correctional institution or facility,
investigators in the Office of the State Treasurer, Police Officer Standards and
Training Council-certified motor vehicle inspectors, U.S. marshals and deputy
marshals, U.S. special agents authorized to enforce federal food and drug laws,
and certified police officers of a law enforcement unit created and governed under
a state-tribal memorandum (CGS § 53a-3(9)). O L R P U B L I C A C T S U M M A R Y
Page 3 of 3
Limits on Chokeholds or Similar Restraints
By law, law enforcement officers are justified in using physical force to the
extent they reasonably believe it is necessary to:
1. arrest or prevent the escape from custody of someone they reasonably
believe has committed an offense (unless the officers know that the arrest
or custody is unauthorized) or
2. defend themselves or a third person from the use or imminent use of
physical force while arresting or attempting to arrest someone or
preventing or attempting to prevent an escape.
PA 20-1, JSS, § 29, limits when an officer may use a chokehold or similar
methods of restraint (i.e., those that are applied to the neck area, impede the
ability to breathe, or restrict blood circulation to the brain). It does so by allowing
these methods only when the officer reasonably believes they are necessary to
defend himself or herself from the use or imminent use of deadly physical force.