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

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-98 (2026)

Custodial interference in the second degree: Class A misdemeanor

✓ 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 second degree when: (1) Being a relative of a child who is less than sixteen years old and intending to hold such child permanently or for a protracted period and knowing that he has no legal right to do so, he takes or entices such child from his lawful custodian; (2) knowing that he has no legal right to do so, he takes or entices from lawful custody any incompetent person or any person entrusted by authority of law to the custody of another person or institution; or (3) knowing that he has no legal right to do so, he holds, keeps or otherwise refuses to return a child who is less than sixteen years old to such child's lawful custodian after a request by such custodian for the return of such child.

(b) Custodial interference in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.

(1969, P.A. 828, S. 100; P.A. 81-280, S. 1.)

History: P.A. 81-280 added Subsec. (a)(3) re failure to return a child to his lawful custodian after a request by the custodian for the child's return.

Cited. 226 C. 652. 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.

Subsec. (a)(3): Legislature intended “refuses to return” to include, at its core, a person who has declined a demand to send back a child to his or her lawful custodian, and this language provides clear notice that it encompasses the behavior of a person who either affirmatively declines to return a child to his or her lawful custodian or declines to take any affirmative steps to return a child to the lawful custodian upon the custodian's request. 197 CA 675; judgment affirmed, see 345 C. 44.

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1993–2024 · leading case: State v. Lori T., 345 Conn. 44 (Conn. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Lori T., 345 Conn. 44 (Conn. 2022). · cites it 49× “Syllabus Pursuant to statute (§ 53a-98 (a) (3)), a person is guilty of custodial interfer- ence in the second degree when, ‘‘knowing that he [or she] has no legal right to do so, he [or she] holds, keeps or otherwise refuses to return a child who is less than sixteen years old…”
State v. Lori T., 197 Conn. App. 675 (Conn. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 28× “, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered following a jury trial, of three counts of custodial interference in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-98 (a) (3). On appeal, the defendant claims that § 53a-98 (a) (3) is unconstitutionally vague in its…”
Marshak v. Marshak, 628 A.2d 964 (Conn. 1993). · cites it 4× “11 *664 General Statutes § 53a-98 provides that a person is guilty of custodial interference when: “(1) Being a relative of a child who is less than sixteen years old and intending to hold such child permanently or for a protracted period and knowing that he has no legal right…”
State v. Vakilzaden, 742 A.2d 767 (Conn. 1999). · cites it 5× “The state argues that we should overrule Marshak and allow joint custodians to be held criminally liable if, in abducting their own child, their intent is to deprive the other joint custodian of his or her equal parental rights permanently or for a protracted period of time in…”
State v. Vakilzaden, 865 A.2d 1155 (Conn. 2005). · cites it 4× “” General Statutes § 53a-98 (a) provides: “A person is guilty of custodial interference in the second degree when: (1) Being a relative of a child who is less than sixteen years old and intending to hold such child permanently or for a protracted period and knowing that he has…”
Bouchard v. Sundberg, 834 A.2d 744 (Conn. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 2× “566 ; and has also recognized that a custodial parent may be guilty of custodial interference pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-98. See State v. Vakilzaden, supra, 251 Conn.”
O'BRIEN v. Superior Court, 939 A.2d 1223 (Conn. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 2× “7 provides in relevant part: "(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…”
In Re Jocquyce C., 5 A.3d 575 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010). · cites it 2× “She subsequently was apprehended by New Haven police and later pleaded guilty to custodial interference in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-98. 3 At the time of trial, the respondent’s second child remained in her custody.”
Haidon v. Bloomfield (D. Conn. 2024). · cites it 14× “Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-98. Therefore, for probable cause to have existed for Haidon’s arrest, there must have been probable cause to believe that: (1) Couloute was a lawful custodian of the child; and (2) Haidon knew she had no legal right to take the child out of Connecticut…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-98(a)(3) — 1 case
Haidon v. Bloomfield (D. Conn. 2024). “Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-98. Therefore, for probable cause to have existed for Haidon’s arrest, there must have been probable cause to believe that: (1) Couloute was a lawful custodian of the child; and (2) Haidon knew she had no legal right to take the child out of Connecticut…”
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.