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

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-97 (2026)

Custodial interference in the first degree: Class D felony

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) A person is guilty of custodial interference in the first degree when he commits custodial interference in the second degree as provided in section 53a-98: (1) Under circumstances which expose the child or person taken or enticed from lawful custody or the child held after a request by the lawful custodian for his return to a risk that his safety will be endangered or his health materially impaired; or (2) by taking, enticing or detaining the child or person out of this state.

(b) Custodial interference in the first degree is a class D felony.

(1969, P.A. 828, S. 99; P.A. 81-280, S. 2; P.A. 92-260, S. 39; P.A. 95-206, S. 1.)

History: P.A. 81-280 amended Subsec. (a)(1) to include risk to a child held after a request by the lawful custodian for his return; P.A. 92-260 made technical changes in Subsec. (a); P.A. 95-206 amended Subsec. (a) by classifying the detention of a child or person out of this state as a violation of custodial interference in the first degree.

Cited. 182 C. 353; 226 C. 652. Joint custodian is not inherently immune from criminal prosecution under section solely on basis of his or her status as a joint custodian. 251 C. 656. Language of statute standing alone provided defendant with fair notice of the illegality of his conduct at the time of his actions. 272 C. 762.

Cited. 34 CS 219.

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2024 · leading case: State v. Vakilzaden, 865 A.2d 1155 (Conn. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Vakilzaden, 865 A.2d 1155 (Conn. 2005). · cites it 15× “This is the state’s second appeal 1 from the judgment of the trial court granting the motion *764 of the defendant, Anthony Vakilzaden, to dismiss an information charging him with one count of custodial interference in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-97,…”
State v. Vakilzaden, 742 A.2d 767 (Conn. 1999). · cites it 14× “On December 11, 1997, the defendant, Anthony Vakilzaden, was charged with one count of custodial interference in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-97 (a) (2) and one count of conspiracy to commit custodial interference in the first degree in violation of…”
O'BRIEN v. Superior Court, 939 A.2d 1223 (Conn. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 8× “From June 25 to July 9, 2003, the plaintiff was trial counsel for T, [2] whom the state had charged with two counts of custodial interference in the first degree; see General Statutes § 53a-97; [3] because of her unauthorized removal of her children from this state.”
Marshak v. Marshak, 628 A.2d 964 (Conn. 1993). · cites it 5× “r removal from the family home; (3) disregarded the effect of the Israeli custody agreement of April 22, 1986, between the plaintiff and her former husband on the defendant’s culpability; and (4) recognized the tort of child abduction when there is no such cause of action in…”
State v. Godek, 438 A.2d 114 (Conn. 1980). · cites it 2× “The first connt charged the crime of unlawful restraint in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-97, and the second count charged the crime of assault in the third degree in violation of General Statutes §53a-61 (a) (2).”
State v. Gewily, 911 A.2d 293 (Conn. 2006). · cites it 2× “to 2001) § 53-21 (a) (l) 1 and one count of custodial interference in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-97. The trial court rendered judgment in accordance with the jury verdict, 2 and the defendant appealed, 3 claiming that the evidence was insufficient to…”
Mirjavadi v. Vakilzadeh, 18 A.3d 591 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 2× “Following his second appeal, Vakilzadeh entered a guilty plea to one count of custodial interference in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-97 (a) (2), one count of conspiracy to commit custodial interference in the first degree in violation of General…”
Haidon v. Bloomfield (D. Conn. 2024). · cites it 6× “After reviewing the separation agreement, making one phone call each to the West Seneca, New York Police Department and to Haidon, and reviewing approximately a dozen emails forwarded to him by Haidon and Couloute, Danaher made the decision that same evening to apply for a…”
Way v. Gormley, 384 A.2d 619 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1977). · cites it 4× “*219 In November, 1976, a warrant for the arrest of Frederick Way was issued, charging him with custodial interference in the first degree in violation of § 53a-97 of the General Statutes. That warrant is still outstanding and is on file with the New Milford police department.”
Rubenstein v. Rubenstein, 851 A.2d 1262 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “The defendant withdrew the claim in light of the adoption of the motion and the accompanying memorandum of law by the plaintiff, the custodians (paternal aunt and uncle) and the attorney for the minor child.”
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.