No child shall be prosecuted for an offense before the regular criminal docket of the Superior Court except as provided in section
46b-127 and subsection (f) of section
46b-133c.
(1949 Rev., S. 2817; P.A. 76-436, S. 29, 681; P.A. 95-225, S. 26.)
History: P.A. 76-436 replaced juvenile court with superior court and added exception, effective July 1, 1978; Sec. 17-72 temporarily renumbered as Sec. 51-326 and ultimately transferred to Sec. 46b-145 in 1979, and references to other sections within provisions revised as necessary by the Revisors to reflect their transfer; P.A. 95-225 limited provisions to prosecutions before the “regular criminal docket” of the Superior Court, deleted provision that prohibited the adjudication of a child as delinquent being deemed a conviction of a crime, deleted reference to Sec. 46b-126, reflecting repeal of said section by same public act, and added exception for a prosecution as provided in Subsec. (f) of Sec. 46b-133c.
Annotations to former section 17-72:
Cited. 115 C. 592; 154 C. 644, 648; 156 C. 632.
Juvenile court commitment is not a criminal prosecution but is a civil inquiry. 19 CS 374.
Annotations to present section:
Cited. 195 C. 303; 206 C. 323; Id., 346; 210 C. 435; 211 C. 151; 229 C. 691.
Cited. 46 CA 545.
Cited. 43 CS 367.
Notes of Decisions
In re Juv. Appeal (85-AB), 488 A.2d 778 (Conn. 1985).
· cites it 4× “See General Statutes § 46b-145. An additional ground alleged was the defendant’s escape from custody at a juvenile detention facility in which he had been held prior to the incident.”
State v. Nathaniel S., 146 A.3d 988 (Conn. 2016).
· cites it 3× “2016) § 46b-127 (a) (1) and thus his case will remain on the juvenile docket unless other circumstances dictate transfer, pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-145. 3 The state offers several arguments as to why P.”
State v. Kelley, 537 A.2d 483 (Conn. 1988).
· cites it 3× “” Under General Statutes § 46b-145, “[n]o child shall be prosecuted for an offense before the superior court, nor shall the adjudication of such court that a child is delinquent in any case be deemed a conviction of crime except as provided in sections 46b-126 and 46b-127.”
In re Prudencio O., 643 A.2d 265 (Conn. 1994).
· cites it 6× “, 330-31; General Statutes § 46b-145; 9 Practice Book § 3.”
State v. Samuel M., 151 A.3d 815 (Conn. 2016).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 46b-145 provides in relevant part that "[n]o child shall be prosecuted for an offense before the regular criminal docket of the Superior Court except as provided in section 46b- *820 127 .”
In re Tyvonne M., 558 A.2d 661 (Conn. 1989).
· cites it 3× “5 Delinquency is defined in General Statutes § 46b-120 as follows: “[A] child may be found ‘delinquent’ (1) who has violated any federal or state law or municipal or local ordinance .”
State v. Torres, 538 A.2d 185 (Conn. 1988).
· cites it 2× “Taken together, these statutes reflect the legislature’s intent to correlate the seriousness of an offense charged with the juvenile’s susceptibility to transfer to the regular criminal docket.”
In re Steven G., 556 A.2d 131 (Conn. 1989).
· cites it 2× “A further manifestation of this distinction is indicated specifically in General Statutes § 46b-145, which provides: “No child shall be prosecuted for an offense before the superior court, nor shall the adjudication of such court that a child is delinquent in any case be deemed…”
State v. Samuel M., 123 A.3d 44 (Conn. App. Ct. 2015).
· cites it 5× “2d 265 (1994); see also General Statutes § 46b-121.21 General Statutes § 46b-145 pro- vides in relevant part that ‘‘[n]o child shall be prose- cuted for an offense before the regular criminal docket of the Superior Court except as provided in section 46b-127.”
In re Daniel H., 654 A.2d 399 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1994).
· cites it 2× “’ Even though a ‘serious juvenile offense’ charges the commission of an act in violation of § 53a-54a, thus relating the offense to a violation of a criminal statute; General Statutes § 46b-120; adjudication of a juvenile offense is not a conviction; General Statutes § 46b-145;…”
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.