Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 18-7a (2026)

Good conduct credit for prisoners

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section, any person sentenced to a term of imprisonment, on and after October 1, 1976, and while still serving such sentence whether such sentence is for a definite, indefinite or indeterminate term, and regardless of the institution wherein the prisoner is confined may, by good conduct and obedience to the rules which have been established for the service of his sentence, earn a commutation or diminution of his sentence in the amount of ten days for each month, and pro rata for a part of a month, of a sentence which is for not more than five years, and fifteen days for each month, and pro rata for a part of a month, for the sixth and each subsequent year of a sentence of more than five years. In the case of an indeterminate sentence, such credit shall apply to both the minimum and maximum term. In the case of an indefinite sentence, such credit shall apply to the maximum term only. Any act of misconduct or refusal to obey the rules which have been established for the service of his sentence shall subject the prisoner to the loss of all or any portion of such credit by the commissioner or his designee.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section, any person sentenced to a term of imprisonment for an offense committed on or after July 1, 1981, may, while held in default of bond or while serving such sentence, by good conduct and obedience to the rules which have been established for the service of his sentence, earn a reduction of his sentence in the amount of ten days for each month and pro rata for a part of a month of a sentence up to five years, and twelve days for each month and pro rata for a part of a month for the sixth and each subsequent year of a sentence which is more than five years. Misconduct or refusal to obey the rules which have been established for the service of his sentence shall subject the prisoner to the loss of all or any portion of such reduction by the commissioner or his designee.

(c) Any person sentenced to a term of imprisonment for an offense committed on or after July 1, 1983, may, while held in default of bond or while serving such sentence, by good conduct and obedience to the rules which have been established for the service of his sentence, earn a reduction of his sentence as such sentence is served in the amount of ten days for each month served and pro rata for a part of a month served of a sentence up to five years, and twelve days for each month served and pro rata for a part of a month served for the sixth and each subsequent year of a sentence which is more than five years. Misconduct or refusal to obey the rules which have been established for the service of his sentence shall subject the prisoner to the loss of all or any portion of such reduction by the commissioner or his designee. In the event a prisoner has not yet earned sufficient good time to satisfy the good time loss, such lost good time shall be deducted from any good time earned in the future by such prisoner.

(P.A. 76-358, S. 2; P.A. 80-442, S. 1, 28; P.A. 82-379, S. 1, 2; P.A. 97-169; P.A. 15-14, S. 4.)

History: P.A. 80-442 added Subsec. (b); P.A. 82-379 added Subsec. (c) re computation of good time for any person sentenced to term of imprisonment for offense committed on or after July 1, 1983; P.A. 97-169 amended Subsec. (c) to add provision requiring lost good time be deducted from good time earned in the future if the prisoner has not yet earned sufficient good time to satisfy the good time loss; P.A. 15-14 amended Subsecs. (a) and (b) by making technical changes.

Section satisfies the rational basis test consistent with command of the equal protection clause. 176 C. 638. Held that credits be calculated according to statute in effect at time of resentencing rather than according to statute effective at time of original sentence. 185 C. 124. Cited. Id., 540; 205 C. 27; 207 C. 412; 209 C. 191; 216 C. 220. Aggregation of consecutive sentences in computation of good-time credit discussed. 217 C. 568. Cited. Id., 584; 219 C. 269; 230 C. 17.

Cited. 24 CA 612; 30 CA 190; 34 CA 503; 39 CA 455.

Applicable to confinements including commitment pursuant to Sec. 19-498(a). 35 CS 544. Cited. 44 CS 417.

Subsec. (b):

Prisoner's enhanced statutory good time commences at the 6th year of his sentence as imposed by the court, without regard to any presentence confinement time or presentence good time. 245 C. 423.

Subsec. (c):

Prospective forfeiture of unearned good time credit is not permitted. 209 C. 191. Statutory good time calculation and credit discussed. 219 C. 269. Two statements in Seno v. Commissioner of Correction were factually and legally inaccurate, thus trial court decision construing Subsec. (b) based in part on Seno was inaccurate. 245 C. 423. “One continuous term” language of Sec. 18-7 is applicable to Subsec. and good time credits earned on an earlier sentence must be credited towards a controlling, subsequently imposed concurrent sentence. 254 C. 214. Petitioner eligible to be considered for award of good time credit under Subsec. for duration of commitment to mental health facility. 258 C. 394.

Cited. 17 CA 827; 36 CA 695; 39 CA 674; 43 CA 176. Commissioner may promulgate rules that make an inmate ineligible to earn statutory good time. 50 CA 421. Good time credit received under section must be interpreted as credit earned in the year it should have been given and in this case, adjustment of respondent's time was not a retroactive adjustment, but rather a correction. 86 CA 777. Habeas court found to have improperly determined that petitioner was not eligible for good time credits; court's interpretation of good time statutes has the potential of burdening defendant in such a manner so as to conclude that the statutes are penal in nature; in resolving a latent ambiguity as to whether defendant was eligible for good time credits, the rule of lenity applied. 101 CA 52. Viewed within context of section, the phrase “term of imprisonment” is susceptible only to one reasonable interpretation, which is that it should be afforded its customary and primary meaning, describing the physical confinement of a person in a correctional facility; there is no basis in law or logic to conclude that it describes or encompasses time spent on probation. 105 CA 210. Subsec. contains no language providing that good time credit earned under Subsec. operates to reduce a person's parole eligibility date, and there is no language in Subsec. to suggest that legislature intended that a person's sentence, after it has been reduced by the application of good time credit, should serve as the sentence that is used to calculate his parole eligibility date under Sec. 54-125a(f). 199 CA 575.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 56 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1978–2022 · leading case: Rivera v. Comm'r of Corr., 756 A.2d 1264 (Conn. 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Rivera v. Comm'r of Corr., 756 A.2d 1264 (Conn. 2000). · cites it 83× “Statutory good time credit is governed by General Statutes § 18-7; see footnote 6 of this opinion; and General Statutes § 18-7a. See footnote 8 of this opinion.”

Seno v. Comm'r of Corr., 593 A.2d 111 (Conn. 1991). · cites it 58× “The sole issue in this appeal is whether a person sentenced to a term of imprisonment exceeding five years must be incarcerated for five calendar years in order to earn statutory good time 1 at the rate of twelve days per month pursuant to General Statutes § 18-7a (c). 2 The…”

Nichols v. Warren, 550 A.2d 309 (Conn. 1988). · cites it 36× “The sole issue in this case is whether General Statutes § 18-7a (c) 1 authorizes the *193 forfeiture of good time credit that a prisoner has not yet earned, after a prisoner has committed disciplinary offenses while incarcerated.”

Tyson v. Comm'r of Corr., 808 A.2d 653 (Conn. 2002). · cites it 30× “to merge the concurrent sentences and determine the prisoner’s discharge by the term of the sentence [that] has the longest term to run.”

Moscone v. Manson, 440 A.2d 848 (Conn. 1981). · cites it 26× “The state has appealed from the judgment of the trial court ordering that these credits be calculated according to the law in effect at the time of the petitioner's resentencing, General Statutes § 18-7a, rather than the law in effect at the time of his original sentencing,…”

Frazier v. Manson, 410 A.2d 475 (Conn. 1979). · cites it 24× “2 *641 General Statutes § 18-7a 3 which, purports to apply to persons sentenced on and after October 1, 1976, provides, in effect, more good time credit than its predecessor, General Statutes § 18-7.”

Abed v. Comm'r of Corr., 682 A.2d 558 (Conn. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 19× “The directive restricts safety threat inmates to close custody units where they are observed at thirty minute intervals and denies them the opportunity to earn statutory good time credits pursuant to General Statutes § 18-7a (c). 1 On January 24, 1994, the petitioner was…”

Connelly v. Comm'r of Corr., 780 A.2d 903 (Conn. 2001). · cites it 14× “The petitioner further claimed that the commissioner improperly denied him good time credit under General Statutes § 18-7a (c) 9 for the time that he was confined at Whiting.”

McCarthy v. Comm'r of Corr., 587 A.2d 116 (Conn. 1991). · cites it 21× “He argues, further, that he is entitled under General Statutes § 18-7a (a)* ** 4 to have his good time credited at the rate of fifteen days *572 per month for the sixth and each subsequent year of his aggregated sentence.”

Chong Chung v. Comm'r of Corr., 717 A.2d 111 (Conn. 1998). · cites it 41× “In this habeas corpus action, the respondent, the commissioner of correction, appeals 1 from the judgment of the trial court ordering amendment of the time sheet of the petitioner, Chong Chung, so as to give the petitioner the benefit of an additional thirty days of posted…”

Plourde v. Liburdi, 540 A.2d 1054 (Conn. 1988). · cites it 13× “The petition alleged an illegal confinement in that the warden had calculated the petitioner’s 120 day sentence following a third conviction for operation of a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of General Statutes § 14-227a 1 without…”

Beasley v. Comm'r of Corr., 718 A.2d 487 (Conn. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 13× “It is therefore impossible to know whether the petitioners will forfeit good time credits that they may later earn and, thus, the establishment of an actual release date for either petitioner is speculative, at best.”

Show all 56 citing cases →

— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 18-7a(c) — 2 cases

Green v. Comm'r of Corr., 194 A.3d 857 (Conn. App. Ct. 2018).

Nichols v. Warren, 550 A.2d 309 (Conn. 1988). “The sole issue in this case is whether General Statutes § 18-7a (c) 1 authorizes the *193 forfeiture of good time credit that a prisoner has not yet earned, after a prisoner has committed disciplinary offenses while incarcerated.”

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.