(a) A person is guilty of assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle when, while operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug or both, he causes serious physical injury to another person as a consequence of the effect of such liquor or drug.
(b) Assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle is a class D felony and the court shall suspend the motor vehicle operator's license or nonresident operating privilege of any person found guilty under this section for one year. The court shall also order such person not to operate any motor vehicle that is not equipped with an approved ignition interlock device, as defined in section 14-227j, for a period of two years after such person's operator's license or nonresident operating privilege is restored by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles.
(P.A. 82-403, S. 2; P.A. 83-534, S. 9; P.A. 85-147, S. 2; P.A. 08-150, S. 60.)
History: P.A. 83-534 amended Subsec. (b) to require the court to suspend the motor vehicle operator's license or nonresident operating privilege of any person found guilty for one year; P.A. 85-147 deleted “while intoxicated” from the title of the offense and a provision that defined “intoxication” to include intoxication by alcohol or by drug or both, and replaced elements of offense of “when, in consequence of his intoxication while operating a motor vehicle, he causes serious physical injury to another person” with “when, while operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug or both, he causes serious physical injury to another person as a consequence of the effect of such liquor or drug”; P.A. 08-150 amended Subsec. (b) to require court to order a person found guilty not to operate any motor vehicle that is not equipped with an approved ignition interlock device for a period of two years after restoration of such person's operator's license or nonresident operating privilege.
See Sec. 14-111g re motor vehicle operator's retraining program.
See Sec. 14-227o re discount for ignition interlock device services.
Cited. 219 C. 752; 222 C. 672; 224 C. 730; 226 C. 191; 230 C. 572. Nothing said in General Assembly proceeding concerning an amendment to section to remedy an unrelated aspect changed the rule of law; judgment of Appellate Court in 33 CA 232 reversed. 232 C. 1.
Cited. 5 CA 590; 9 CA 686; 16 CA 472; 21 CA 138; 22 CA 142; 23 CA 215; Id., 720; 25 CA 282; 26 CA 805; 32 CA 553; 33 CA 232; judgment reversed, see 232 C. 1; 34 CA 557; Id., 655; 36 CA 710; 38 CA 282; 40 CA 359. Nothing in Sec. 14-227a prohibits evidence of consciousness of guilt based on defendant's refusal to take a breath test being considered in a prosecution under this section. 63 CA 433.
Notes of Decisions
McCoy v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 12 A.3d 948 (Conn. 2011).
· cites it 17× “Section 14-227a (g) provides that a conviction under General Statutes § 53a-56b, which defines the offense of manslaughter in the second degree with a motor vehicle and is a class C felony, or General Statutes § 53a-60d, which defines assault in the second degree with a motor…”
State v. Geisler, 576 A.2d 1283 (Conn. App. Ct. 1990).
· cites it 14× “The defendant was charged, by substitute information, with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of liquor in violation of General Statutes § 14-227a (a) (2), assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 53a-60d and evading…”
State v. Leroy, 653 A.2d 161 (Conn. 1995).
· cites it 10× “See General Statutes § 53a-60d. In order for legal causation to exist in a criminal prosecution, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was both the cause in fact, or actual cause, as well as the proximate cause of the victim’s injuries.”
State v. Geisler, 610 A.2d 1225 (Conn. 1992).
· cites it 4× “In a three count substitute information, the defendant, Martin Geisler, was charged with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of General Statutes § 14-227a (a) (2), 1 assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle in…”
Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (2004).
“§ 18 -3— 205(1)(b)(I) (Lexis 2003); Conn. Gen. Stat. §53a-60d(a) (2008); Ga. Code Ann.”
State v. Stevens, 620 A.2d 789 (Conn. 1993).
· cites it 4× “Stevens, was charged in a two count information with assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle while intoxicated in violation of General Statutes § 53a-60d and with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of General…”
State v. DesLaurier, 646 A.2d 108 (Conn. 1994).
· cites it 4× “The defendant, James DesLaurier, was convicted after a jury trial of assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 53a-60d, 1 and operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of General Statutes §…”
State v. DesLaurier, 630 A.2d 119 (Conn. App. Ct. 1993).
· cites it 7× “The defendant appeals from his conviction of assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 53a-60d 1 and operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of General Statutes *555 § 14-227a.”
State v. Geisler, 594 A.2d 985 (Conn. App. Ct. 1991).
· cites it 4× “2d 1283 (1990), is affirmed and the case is again remanded for a new trial on the charge of assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle under General Statutes § 53a-60d. In this opinion O’Connell, Norcott, Foti, Lavery, Landau and Heiman, Js.”
Harris v. Comm'r of Corr., 860 A.2d 715 (Conn. 2004).
· cites it 2× “CR 98-516413, the petitioner was sentenced to four years imprisonment for assault in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-60d (a). In Docket No.”
State v. McCarthy, 775 A.2d 1013 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001).
· cites it 5× “The jury found the defendant guilty of assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle in violation of General Statutes § 53a-60d 1 and of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs in violation of General Statutes (Rev.”
State v. Stevens, 603 A.2d 1203 (Conn. App. Ct. 1992).
· cites it 4× “Stevens, appeals from a judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of assault in the second degree with a motor vehicle while intoxicated in violation of General Statutes § 53a-60d, and operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-60d(a) — 1 case
Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (2004).
“§ 18 -3— 205(1)(b)(I) (Lexis 2003); Conn. Gen. Stat. §53a-60d(a) (2008); Ga. Code Ann.”
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.