Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 53a — PENAL CODE · Chapter 952 — Penal Code: Offenses
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-128d (2026)

Illegal use of payment card. Presumption of knowledge of revocation

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any person who, with intent to defraud the issuer, a participating party, or a person providing money, goods, services or anything else of value, or any other person, (1) uses for the purpose of obtaining money, goods, services or anything else of value a payment card obtained or retained in violation of section 53a-128b or a payment card which such person knows is forged, expired or revoked, or (2) obtains money, goods, services or anything else of value by representing without the consent of the cardholder that such person is the holder of a specified card or by representing that such person is the holder of a card and such card has not in fact been issued, or (3) uses a payment card obtained or retained in violation of section 53a-128c or a payment card which such person knows is forged, expired or revoked, as authority or identification to cash or to attempt to cash or otherwise to negotiate or transfer or to attempt to negotiate or transfer any check or other order for the payment of money, whether or not negotiable, if such negotiation or transfer or attempt to negotiate or transfer would constitute a violation of section 53a-128 violates this subsection and is subject to the penalties set forth in subsection (a) of section 53a-128i, if the value of all money, goods, services and other things of value obtained in violation of this subsection does not exceed five hundred dollars in any six-month period; and is subject to the penalties set forth in subsection (b) of section 53a-128i, if such value does exceed five hundred dollars in any such six-month period. Knowledge of revocation shall be presumed to have been received by a cardholder four days after it has been mailed to such cardholder, at the address set forth on the payment card or at such cardholder's last-known address. If the address is located outside the United States, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Canal Zone or Canada, notice shall be presumed to have been received ten days after mailing by registered or certified mail.

(1971, P.A. 871, S. 32; P.A. 17-26, S. 4.)

History: P.A. 17-26 replaced “credit card” with “payment card”, deleted provision re method of mailing, and made technical changes.

Cited. 204 C. 441. Convictions under Subdiv. (2) of this section, Sec. 53a-129d and Sec. 53a-125b do not violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. 326 C. 310.

Review of legislative history of credit card crimes reveals no purpose or intent that enactment of the more specific crime of illegal credit card use precludes state from charging defendant with the more general crime of larceny. 75 CA 756. Conviction under this section and Secs. 53a-129b and 53a-129d for single course of conduct does not constitute double jeopardy. 119 CA 483.

Cited. 37 CS 527.

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases, 1980–2020 · leading case: State v. Bozelko, 987 A.2d 1102 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Bozelko, 987 A.2d 1102 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010). · cites it 13× “In docket number CR-05-128445, the defendant was convicted of attempt *486 to commit larceny in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-122 and 53a-49; identity theft in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-129b; attempt to commit illegal use…”
State v. Schovanec, 163 A.3d 581 (Conn. 2017). · cites it 4× “The defendant, Frank Schovanec, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered following a jury trial, of identity theft in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-129d, credit card theft in violation of General Statutes § 53a-128c(a), illegal use of a credit…”
Ajadi v. Comm'r of Corr., 911 A.2d 712 (Conn. 2006). “Thereafter, on November 5,1997, in the judicial district of Stamford-Norwalk, geographical area number twenty, located in the city of Norwalk, the petitioner pleaded guilty pursuant to the Alford doctrine 5 to one count of larceny in the third degree in violation of General…”
State v. Walker, 204 A.3d 38 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 2× “to 1999) § 53a-217, two counts of credit card theft in violation of General Statutes § 53a-128c (a), three counts of fraudulent use of an automatic teller machine in violation of General Statutes § 53a-127b, two counts of illegal use of a credit card in violation of General…”
Anderson v. Comm'r of Corr., 15 A.3d 658 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 2× “In the underlying criminal matters, the petitioner was charged with three *540 counts of burglary in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-103, one count of larceny in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-123, two counts of larceny in the…”
State v. Jerrell R., 202 A.3d 1044 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 2× “3d 581 , the defendant was convicted of identity theft in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-129d, credit card theft in violation of General Statutes § 53a-128c (a), illegal use of a credit card in violation of General Statutes § 53a-128d (2), and larceny in…”
State v. Carcare, 818 A.2d 53 (Conn. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 2× “8 The defendant claims that the court improperly denied his motions for a judgment of acquittal (1) because one cannot be guilty of larceny in the fifth degree in violation of § 53a-125a by use of a credit card when the legislature specifically has proscribed the illegal use of…”
State v. Walker, 835 A.2d 1058 (Conn. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 2× “in violation of General Statutes § 53a-62 (a) (2), criminal possession of a weapon in violation of General Statutes § 53a-217, two counts of credit card theft in violation of General Statutes § 53a-128c (a), three counts of fraudulent use of an automatic teller machine in…”
State v. Sostre, 802 A.2d 754 (Conn. 2002). “” General Statutes § 53a-128g provides in relevant part: “Any person who receives money, goods, services or anything else of value obtained in viola *129 tion of section 53a-128d, knowing or believing the same to have been so obtained, violates this section and is subject to the…”
State v. McGraw, 528 A.2d 821 (Conn. 1987). · cites it 2× “General Statutes § 53a-128d. Defense counsel objected to this proposed questioning on three grounds.”
Bozelko v. Comm'r of Corr., 196 Conn. App. 627 (Conn. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 3× “1 The petitioner was convicted, after a jury trial, of attempt to commit larceny in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-122 and 53a-49; larceny in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a- 124; two counts of larceny in the fifth degree in…”
State v. Stonick, 171 A.3d 1111 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 2× “The defendant, Katherine Lee Stonick, appeals from the judgment of the trial court noting a nolle prosequi to charges then pending against her of larceny in the sixth degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-125b and illegal use of a credit card in violation of General…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-128d(2) — 2 cases
State v. Schovanec, 163 A.3d 581 (Conn. 2017). “The defendant, Frank Schovanec, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered following a jury trial, of identity theft in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-129d, credit card theft in violation of General Statutes § 53a-128c(a), illegal use of a credit…”
Stonick v. Westport (D. Conn. 2020).
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.