Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 17a — SOCIAL AND HUMAN SERVICES AND RESOURCES · Chapter 319j — Addiction Services
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-695 (2025)

(Formerly Sec. 19a-127d). Motion for suspension of prosecution and treatment for alcohol and drug dependency

✓ 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
After receipt by the court of the examination report, the accused person may make a motion for suspension of prosecution and an order of treatment for alcohol or drug dependency pursuant to the provisions of section 17a-696. Unless the opportunity for a hearing is waived by both the accused person and the state's attorney, the court shall hear the motion. The clinical examiner shall not be required to be present to testify on the report unless the presence of the clinical examiner is requested by the court, the accused person or the state's attorney.

(P.A. 89-390, S. 5, 37; June 18 Sp. Sess. P.A. 97-8, S. 15, 88.)

History: Sec. 17a-652 transferred to Sec. 19a-127d in 1995; Sec. 19a-127d transferred to Sec. 17a-695 in 1997; June 18 Sp. Sess. P.A. 97-15 replaced references to examining committee with clinical examiner, effective July 1, 1997.

Annotations to former section 17a-652:

Cited. 223 C. 907; 226 C. 191.

Cited. 27 CA 225.

Annotation to present section:

Defendant does not possess a right that would be irreparably lost without interlocutory review of a denied motion for treatment of alcohol or drug dependency or suspension of prosecution. 53 CA 781.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1999–2010 · leading case: Tuck v. Comm'r of Corr., 1 A.3d 1111 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tuck v. Comm'r of Corr., 1 A.3d 1111 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010). · cites it 2× “See General Statutes § 17a-695 et seq. 3 The petitioner also alleged in his amended petition that Urso failed to advise him (1) of the elements of the crime for which he went to trial and (2) not to continue the trial process once the motion to suppress had been denied.”
State v. Easton, 959 A.2d 1085 (Conn. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 2× “1 See General Statutes § 17a-695. The CADAC hearing was to determine if the defendant was drug-dependent such that prosecution on the underlying charges should be suspended and treatment ordered.”
State v. Russo, 732 A.2d 783 (Conn. App. Ct. 1999). · cites it 4× “On September 23, 1998, the defendant filed a motion for examination *783 for alcohol or drug dependency, 1 which the trial court granted.”
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.