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 24-137—sHB 5500
Judiciary Committee
AN ACT CONCERNING RE VISIONS TO VARIOUS L AWS
CONCERNING IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICES, THE DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTION, JUDICIAL RETIREMENT SALARIES AND
CRIMINAL LAW AND CRI MINAL PROCEDURE
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
§ 1 — APPOINTED COUNSEL IN PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING FIREARM
RISK PROTECTION ORDERS OR RISK WARRANTS
Requires an attorney to be appointed for certain adults for in-court proceedings for firearm risk
protection orders or risk warrants
§ 2 — END OF IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE REQUIREMENTS
Sets conditions under which IID requirements end earlier than usual following (1) specific
outcomes after DUI arrests where cannabis was the only detected intoxicating substance, such as
the withdrawal or dismissal of the charges, and (2) pardons for DUI convictions involving alcohol
§ 3 — LOCATION OF CRIMES COMMITTED THROU GH ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATION
Specifies that offenses committed by communications through computer networks, cell phones, or
similar means can be considered to have been committed either where the communication was
sent or received
§ 4 — COMPENSATION OF INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS
Explicitly allows DOC, when setting pay rates for incarcerated individuals performing services on
the state’s behalf, to give higher rates than the minimum based on skill or other factors, and
eliminates the $10 weekly limit on this pay
§ 5 — ROUNDING OF CASH BAIL
Requires cash bail amounts to be rounded down to the nearest dollar
§ 6 — FACTORS TO RESTORE COMPETENCY
Adds specific factors that a court must consider when determining the least restrictive placement
for a person to restore their competency for trial; generally requires the court, in misdemeanor
cases, to presume that outpatient treatment is the appropriate placement
§ 7 — JUDICIAL PENSIONS
Makes technical and conforming changes to a law on the retirement salaries of certain judicial
officials without 10 years of service
§ 8 — STANDING CRIMINAL PROTECTIVE ORDER S O L R P U B L I C A C T S U M M A R Y
Page 2 of 5
Extends the law on standing criminal protective orders to defendants found not guilty due to
mental disease or defect
SUMMARY: This act makes various unrelated changes in court- and criminal law-
related matters as described in the section-by-section analysis below.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2024, except as otherwise noted below.
§ 1 — APPOINTED COUNSEL IN PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING FIREARM
RISK PROTECTION ORDERS OR RISK WARRANTS
Requires an attorney to be appointed for certain adults for in-court proceedings for firearm risk
protection orders or risk warrants
Existing law allows the police or a prosecutor, under limited circumstances, to
apply to court for a risk protection order prohibiting an adult at imminent risk of
injuring themselves or someone else from obtaining or possessing firearms, other
deadly weapons, or ammunition. The court may also issue a risk warrant for the
police to seize these items if the person has them (CGS § 29-38c(a)).
The act requires an attorney to be appointed for the person for purposes of in-
court proceedings relating to these orders or warrants (see Background — Risk
Protection Order or Warrant Hearings) if the person (1) cannot afford an attorney,
(2) is represented by a public defender or assigned counsel in a pending in-state
criminal case, and (3) is eligible for counsel under the public defender laws.
In doing so, the act makes similar changes as 2023 legislation did for the
separate risk warrant process for minors. PA 23-89 required counsel to be appointed
on the child’s behalf for juvenile court proceedings if the child and his or her parent
or guardian (1) cannot afford counsel and (2) are eligible for counsel under the
public defender laws.
Background — Risk Protection Order or Warrant Hearings
Within 14 days after a risk protection order or warrant has been issued, the court
serving the town where the subject lives must hold a hearing to determine if the
order should continue to apply or if the items seized through the warrant should
continue to be held by the state. As long as the order or warrant remain in effect,
the subject also can request a hearing every 180 days after the initial one (CGS §
29-38c(e) & (f)).
§ 2 — END OF IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE REQUIREMENTS
Sets conditions under which IID requirements end earlier than usual following (1) specific
outcomes after DUI arrests where cannabis was the only detected intoxicating substance, such as
the withdrawal or dismissal of the charges, and (2) pardons for DUI convictions involving alcohol
By law, motorists implicitly consent to be tested for alcohol or drugs and submit
to the nontestimonial portion of a drug influence evaluation. In connection with an O L R P U B L I C A C T S U M M A R Y
Page 3 of 5
arrest for driving under the influence (DUI), the law establishes administrative
license suspension procedures for when a (1) driver refuses to submit to a test or
evaluation or whose test results indicate an elevated blood alcohol content, or (2)
police officer, through an investigation, concludes that the driver was driving under
the influence of alcohol, a drug, or both. Generally, if a driver’s license is suspended
under this law, the driver must then (1) install and maintain an ignition interlock
device (IID) on each vehicle he or she owns or operates and (2) operate only IID-
equipped vehicles for a specified period.
The act sets conditions under which these IID requirements end earlier than
otherwise required by law. First, if the person was arrested for DUI and cannabis
was the only detected intoxicating substance, the requirements end when the (1)
person is acquitted or all charges are withdrawn, nolled, or dismissed, or (2)
person’s conviction is vacated, overturned, or erased. Second, if the person was
convicted for DUI and alcohol was one of the intoxicating substances, the
requirements end if the person received an absolute pardon. In either case, the motor
vehicles commissioner must notify the person in writing when the IID requirements
have ended.
The act specifies that these provisions do not affect any other requirements or
conditions that apply to the person.
§ 3 — LOCATION OF CRIMES COMMITTED THROU GH ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATION
Specifies that offenses committed by communications through computer networks, cell phones, or
similar means can be considered to have been committed either where the communication was
sent or received
The act specifies that any offense committed through communication using
various forms of technology may be considered to have been committed either at
the place where the communication originated or was received.
Specifically, the act applies to communications sent through an interactive
computer service, computer network, telecommunications service, cellular system,
electronic communication service, or electronic communication system (as defined
under specified laws), including email or text messages or any other electronic
messages, whether by digital media accounts, messaging programs, or applications.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon passage and applicable to offenses committed before,
on, or after that date.
§ 4 — COMPENSATION OF INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS
Explicitly allows DOC, when setting pay rates for incarcerated individuals performing services on
the state’s behalf, to give higher rates than the minimum based on skill or other factors, and
eliminates the $10 weekly limit on this pay
By law, the Department of Correction (DOC) commissioner, after consulting
with the administrative services commissioner and the Office of Policy and
Management secretary, must set the compensation schedule for incarcerated O L R P U B L I C A C T S U M M A R Y
Page 4 of 5
individuals for services they perform on the state’s behalf at DOC facilities. The
schedule must recognize degrees of merit, diligence, and skill, to encourage these
individuals’ incentive and industry.
PA 23-204, § 153, required a pay range of between $5 and $10 per week. This
act instead sets a rate of $1 per day, with higher pay rates based on skill level or
other factors as the DOC commissioner or his designee determines.
The act also makes technical changes.
§ 5 — ROUNDING OF CASH BAIL
Requires cash bail amounts to be rounded down to the nearest dollar
By law, anyone detained in a community correctional center under a bench
warrant or for arraignment, sentencing, or trial must be released upon posting a
bond or cash bail. The act requires the bail amount to be rounded down to the
nearest dollar.
§ 6 — FACTORS TO RESTORE COMPETENCY
Adds specific factors that a court must consider when determining the least restrictive placement
for a person to restore their competency for trial; generally requires the court, in misdemeanor
cases, to presume that outpatient treatment is the appropriate placement
By law, a defendant in a criminal trial cannot be tried, convicted, or sentenced
while he or she is not competent (i.e., is unable to understand the proceedings and
assist in his or her own defense). Generally, if the court finds that there is a
substantial probability that the defendant will regain competency after a course of
treatment, it must order the defendant to be placed (1) for that treatment (in the
custody of the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) or
certain other agencies, including remaining in DOC custody in some cases) to
become competent or (2) in DMHAS custody at a treatment facility pending civil
commitment proceedings. Any court-ordered treatment, on an inpatient or
outpatient basis, must be the least restrictive placement appropriate and available
to restore competency.
The act adds factors that a court must consider when determining this least
restrictive placement. Specifically, the court must consider the following:
1. the nature and circumstances of the alleged crime;
2. the defendant’s record of criminal convictions and appearing in court;
3. the defendant’s family and community ties;
4. the defendant’s willingness and ability to engage with the treatment, and
whether his or her substance use would interfere with the ability to succeed
in the placement;
5. any of the defendant’s psychiatric symptoms, including their nature and
severity; and
6. any other relevant factors specific to the defendant and his or her
circumstances.
Under the act, if the defendant is not charged with a felony, the court must O L R P U B L I C A C T S U M M A R Y
Page 5 of 5
presume that outpatient treatment is the least restrictive placement appropriate and
available to restore competency. But this does not apply if the court has good cause
to find otherwise based on the above factors.
§ 7 — JUDICIAL PENSIONS
Makes technical and conforming changes to a law on the retirement salaries of certain judicial
officials without 10 years of service
By law, for judges, family support magistrates, and workers’ compensation
administrative law judges who began service on or after July 1, 2014, and retire
before serving for 10 years due to disability or reaching the mandatory retirement
age (70), their retirement salary is reduced by 10% for each year they served less
than that (CGS § 51-50(b)(2)). The act makes technical and conforming changes to
a related law by replacing an obsolete provision with one specifying that the
retirement salary for these officials who retire at age 70 without 10 years of service
must be reduced according to the above law.
These officials without 10 years of service are otherwise ineligible for a
retirement salary (see CGS § 51-49i(a)).
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2024
§ 8 — STANDING CRIMINAL PROTECTIVE ORDERS
Extends the law on standing criminal protective orders to defendants found not guilty due to
mental disease or defect
The act allows courts to issue, on a victim’s behalf, a standing criminal
protective order for someone found not guilty of a crime due to mental disease or
defect, under the same standards and requirements that apply following a criminal
conviction.
Under existing law, a court may issue a standing criminal protective order if the
defendant is convicted of certain crimes (e.g., sexual assault or family violence
crimes) if the court determines that the offender’s criminal conduct indicates that
the order will best serve the interest of the victim and the public. For other crimes,
a judge may issue a standing criminal protective order for good cause shown. The
order remains in place for the period the court sets, unless the court modifies or
revokes it for good cause.