Connecticut General Statutes
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-33m (2026)
Failure to wear seat belt not probable cause for vehicle search
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official)
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The failure of an operator of, or passenger in, a private passenger motor vehicle or vanpool vehicle to wear a seat safety belt as required by section 14-100a shall not constitute probable cause for a law enforcement official to conduct a search of such vehicle and its contents.
(P.A. 85-429, S. 7, 8; P.A. 21-175, S. 16.)
History: P.A. 21-175 deleted “front seat”.
| (Return to Chapter Table of Contents) |
(Return to List of Chapters) |
(Return to List of Titles) |
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 2001–2007 · leading case: State v. Wragg, 764 A.2d 216 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001).
State v. Wragg, 764 A.2d 216 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001). “General Statutes § 54-33m expressly provides that failure of an operator to wear a seat belt “shall not constitute probable cause for a law enforcement official to conduct a search of such vehicle and its contents.”
State v. Dalzell, 901 A.2d 706 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006). “” General Statutes § 54-33m provides: “The failure of an operator of, or front seat passenger in, a private passenger motor vehicle or vanpool vehicle to wear a seat safety belt as required by section 14-100a shall not constitute probable cause for a law enforcement official to…”
United States v. Bowers, 490 F. Supp. 2d 285 (D. Conn. 2007). “§ 54-33m, which states that the failure of an operator or passenger of a vehicle to wear their seat belt "shall not constitute probable cause for a law enforcement official to conduct a search of such vehicle and its contents.” That statute is irrelevant to this case because…”
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.