(a) A person is guilty of criminal mischief in the fourth degree when, having no reasonable ground to believe such person has a right to do so, such person intentionally or recklessly (1) damages or tampers with any fire hydrant or hydrant system owned by the state or a municipality, fire district or private water company; or (2) damages, tampers with or removes any tangible property owned by the state, a municipality or a person for fire alarm, smoke detection and alarm, fire suppressant or police alarm purposes; or (3) damages or tampers with any fire hydrant or hydrant system owned by the state or a municipality that is located on public land; or (4) damages, tampers with or removes any tangible property owned by the state or a municipality that is located on public land for fire alarm, smoke detection and alarm, fire suppressant or police alarm purposes.
(b) Criminal mischief in the fourth degree is a class C misdemeanor.
(P.A. 83-330, S. 2; P.A. 84-546, S. 125, 173; P.A. 85-132; P.A. 05-234, S. 7.)
History: P.A. 84-546 changed “public alarm purposes” to “police alarm purposes”; P.A. 85-132 amended Subsec. (a)(2) by prohibiting removal of any of the specified property and by including property used for smoke detection and alarm or fire suppressant purposes; P.A. 05-234 added Subsec. (a)(3) and (4) re damaging or tampering with any fire hydrant or hydrant system owned by the state or a municipality located on public land and re damaging, tampering with or removing any tangible property owned by the state or a municipality located on public land for fire alarm, smoke detection and alarm, fire suppressant or police alarm purposes and made technical changes, effective January 1, 2006.
See Sec. 53a-44a re surcharge on fine for criminal mischief on public land.
Cited. 20 CA 101.
Secs. 53a-117b to 53a-117d. Reserved for future use.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases, 1989–2018 · leading case:
State v. Parnoff, 186 A.3d 640 (Conn. 2018).
State v. Parnoff, 186 A.3d 640 (Conn. 2018).
· cites it 2× “He was later charged with disorderly conduct in violation of § 53a-182 (a) (1) and fourth degree criminal mischief in violation of General Statutes § 53a-117a (a) (1) for tampering with the fire hydrant.”
In re Christopher G., 564 A.2d 619 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 53a-117a. The defendant claims that the trial court erred (1) in requiring him to commence his defense prior to the completion of the state’s case-in-chief, and (2) in denying him access to certain psychiatric records of the victim.”
State v. Parnoff (Conn. App. Ct. 2015).
· cites it 2× “The defendant was charged with disorderly conduct in violation of § 53a-182 (a) (1) and criminal mischief in the fourth degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-117a (a) (1).5 A jury found him guilty of disorderly conduct, but not guilty of criminal mischief.”
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.