Any accused person or the state, aggrieved by an order of the Superior Court concerning release, may petition the Appellate Court for review of such order. Any such petition shall have precedence over any other matter before said Appellate Court and any hearing shall be heard expeditiously with reasonable notice.
(1967, P.A. 549, S. 17; 1972, P.A. 108, S. 13; P.A. 74-183, S. 144, 291; P.A. 76-436, S. 544, 681; June Sp. Sess. P.A. 83-29, S. 17, 82.)
History: 1972 act replaced circuit court with court of common pleas, effective September 1, 1972, except that courts with cases pending retain jurisdiction; P.A. 74-183 replaced circuit court with court of common pleas, replaced appellate division of common pleas court with superior court and required hearing be “heard expeditiously with reasonable notice” rather than “held on one-day notice to the parties concerned”, effective December 31, 1974; P.A. 76-436 replaced court of common pleas with superior court and deleted provisions re superior court's power to review common pleas court orders, leaving supreme court with sole power of review, reflecting transfer of all trial jurisdiction to superior court, effective July 1, 1978; June Sp. Sess. P.A. 83-29 deleted reference to supreme court and substituted appellate court in lieu thereof.
Appeal from refusal of bail in capital case allowed and new hearing ordered to determine whether case falls in constitutional exception to bail in capital case where proof is evident or presumption great. 159 C. 264. Cited. 222 C. 331; 230 C. 441; 233 C. 44; 237 C. 339; 240 C. 623.
Cited. 9 CA 74; 34 CA 46; 43 CA 851. Existence of statute, a legislatively created remedy, precludes the use of a writ of error to review an order concerning release. 110 CA 653. Petition to Appellate Court under section is exclusive method to challenge order pertaining to bail. 125 CA 775.
Cited. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 21, 167, 536, 549.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
50
cases (
8 in the last 5 years), 1969–2026 · leading case:
State v. Fernando a., 981 A.2d 427 (Conn. 2009).
State v. Fernando a., 981 A.2d 427 (Conn. 2009).
· cites it 16× “[22] This defense evidence, along with the comprehensive initial proffer and the submission of evidence by the state, further will ensure that there will be a record adequate to review, on an expedited basis under General Statutes § 54-63g, [23] the trial court's ruling with…”
State v. McCahill, 811 A.2d 667 (Conn. 2002).
· cites it 14× “This is a petition for bail review filed by the state pursuant to General Statutes § 54-63g. 1 The dispositive issue presented is whether an amendment to General Statutes (Rev.”
In Re Jud. Inquiry No. 2005-02, 977 A.2d 166 (Conn. 2009).
· cites it 14× “In Ayala , the defendant, Enrique Ayala, filed a petition for review with the Appellate Court pursuant to General Statutes § 54-63g, 9 challenging the trial court’s revocation of his bail.”
State v. Ayala, 610 A.2d 1162 (Conn. 1992).
· cites it 8× “3 In response to the defendant’s petition for review, pursuant to General Statutes § 54-63g, 4 the Appellate Court granted review but denied the relief requested.”
State v. Patel, 171 A.3d 1037 (Conn. 2017).
· cites it 12× “First, the state contends that General Statutes § 54-63g and Practice Book § 78a-1, which the defendant has invoked as the basis for this court's jurisdiction, do not apply to postconviction bail orders.”
State v. Wright, 870 A.2d 1039 (Conn. 2005).
· cites it 4× “If the defendant believed that the order did not comport with the statutory requirements of § 46b-38c (e), he had two lawful remedies available to him. He could have: (1) sought to have the order modified or vacated by a judge of the Superior Court pursuant to Practice Book §…”
State v. Hopkins, 772 A.2d 657 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001).
· cites it 4× “The parties have tried the case, a jury has convicted the defendant and a court has sentenced him.”
State v. Winter, 979 A.2d 608 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009).
· cites it 4× “He could have: (1) sought to have the order modified or vacated by a judge of the Superior Court pursuant to Practice Book § 38-13; or (2) appealed the terms of the order to the Appellate Court in accordance with General Statutes § 54-63g.”
Willow Funding Co., L.P. v. Grencom Assocs., 779 A.2d 174 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001).
· cites it 2× “, General Statutes § 52-278l (prejudgment remedies); General Statutes § 54-63g (petition for review of bail); General Statutes § 51-164x (court closure orders); State v.”
Waterbury Teachers Ass'n v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 645 A.2d 978 (Conn. 1994).
· cites it 2× “, General Statutes § 52-278l (prejudgment remedies); General Statutes § 54-63g (petition for review of bail); General Statutes § 51-164x (court closure orders); State v.”
Doe v. Connecticut Bar Examining Comm., 818 A.2d 14 (Conn. 2003).
· cites it 2× “, General Statutes § 52-278l (prejudgment remedies); General Statutes § 54-63g (petition for review of bail); General Statutes § 51-164x (court closure orders); State v.”
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.