Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 53 — CRIMES · Chapter 941 — Offenses Against Private Property
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-142k (2025)

Organized retail theft

✓ 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
(a) As used in this section:

(1) “Retail property” means any new article, product, commodity, item or component intended to be sold in retail commerce;

(2) “Value” means the retail value of an item as advertised by the affected retail establishment, including applicable taxes; and

(3) “Retail property fence” means a person who buys retail property when such person knows or should know the property is stolen and with the intent to unlawfully distribute the property or to promote, manage, carry on or facilitate a violation of subsection (b) of this section.

(b) Any person who, for financial gain and in conjunction with one or more other persons, commits larceny by shoplifting, as defined in section 53a-119, of retail property having an aggregate value exceeding two thousand dollars and (1) wrongfully takes such property during a period of one hundred eighty days, or (2) sells, delivers or otherwise transfers such property to a retail property fence, shall have committed the offense of organized retail theft.

(c) Any person who receives, possesses, conceals, stores, barters, sells or disposes of any retail property acquired in violation of subsection (b) of this section, with the intent to distribute the proceeds or otherwise promote, manage, carry on or facilitate a violation of said subsection, shall have committed the offense of accessory to organized retail theft.

(d) It shall not be a defense to a charge of accessory to organized retail theft in violation of subsection (c) of this section that the retail property was obtained by means other than through a violation of said subsection if the property was explicitly represented to the person charged under said subsection (c) as being obtained through the commission of organized retail theft.

(e) Any person who violates subsection (b) or (c) of this section shall be guilty of a class D felony, except that, if such person derives a financial benefit of ten thousand dollars or more as a result of such violation, such person shall be guilty of a class C felony.

(P.A. 10-177, S. 1.)

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2022–2023 · leading case: State v. Joseph V., No. SC20504 (Conn. Dec. 13, 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Joseph V., No. SC20504 (Conn. Dec. 13, 2022). · cites it 2× “pursuant to a scheme to defraud’’); General Statutes § 53a-196e (a) (‘‘[a] person is guilty of possessing child pornography in the second degree when such person knowingly possesses (1) twenty or more but fewer than fifty visual depictions of child pornography, or (2) a series…”
State v. Douglas C., No. SC20456 (Conn. Jan. 10, 2023). · cites it 2× “A Connecticut statute of this kind would be General Statutes § 15-173, which, for docking violations, imposes a daily fine of up to $10,000 (or $25,000 for first violations committed wilfully or with criminal negligence, and $50,000 for subsequent criminal violations); see…”
State v. Joseph V., 345 Conn. 516 (2022). · cites it 2× “pursuant to a scheme to defraud’’); General Statutes § 53a-196e (a) (‘‘[a] person is guilty of possessing child pornography in the second degree when such person knowingly possesses (1) twenty or more but fewer than fifty visual depictions of child pornography, or (2) a series…”
State v. Douglas C. (Concurrence), No. SC20456 (Conn. Jan. 10, 2023). · cites it 2× “A Connecticut statute of this kind would be General Statutes § 15-173, which, for docking violations, imposes a daily fine of up to $10,000 (or $25,000 for first violations committed wilfully or with criminal negligence, and $50,000 for subsequent criminal violations); see…”
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.