Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 14-227o (2025)

Ignition interlock device services. Discount re for indigent persons

✓ laws through the 2024 session: the source has not yet published 2025 Public Acts (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes requiring a person subject to an order to install and maintain an ignition interlock device to bear all costs associated with such installation and maintenance, any provider of ignition interlock device services, including installation, maintenance and removal of such devices, may include in a lease agreement with a person required to install such device pursuant to section 14-36, 14-111, 14-111n, 14-227a, 14-227b, 14-227j, 14-227m, 14-227n, 53a-56b or 53a-60d, a reduction to or an elimination of the charge for such services if such person is indigent. Such person may provide to the provider of such ignition interlock device services as proof of indigency a valid participation card or letter indicating participation in the state-administered federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or the state-administered federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program. Any such letter shall be on letterhead stationery of the Department of Social Services and in original form.

(P.A. 18-30, S. 1.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2020–2025 · leading case: State v. Schimanski, 280 A.3d 92 (Conn. 2022).
State v. Schimanski, 280 A.3d 92 (Conn. 2022). · cites it 2× “may include in a lease agreement with a person required to install such device . . .”
Pence v. Comm'r of Motor Vehs. (Dissent), No. AC47595 (Conn. App. Ct. Sept. 23, 2025). · cites it 3× “Such person may provide to the provider of such ignition interlock device services as proof of indigency a valid participation card or letter indicating participation in the state-administered federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or the state-adminis- tered federal…”
State v. Schimanski, 242 A.3d 119 (Conn. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “9 We also observe that General Statutes § 14-227o, which was effective on October 1, 2018, provides in relevant part: ‘‘Notwithstanding any provision of the general statutes requiring a person subject to an order to install and maintain an ignition interlock device to bear all…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.