(a) Whenever in any criminal prosecution the state's attorney for any judicial district or the assistant state's attorney is of the opinion that the bond without or with surety given by any accused person is excessive or insufficient in amount or security, or that the written promise of such person to appear is inadequate, or whenever any accused person alleges that the amount or security of the bond given by such accused person is excessive, such state's attorney or assistant state's attorney or the accused person may bring an application to the court in which the prosecution is pending or to any judge thereof, alleging such excess, insufficiency, or inadequacy, and, after notice as hereinafter provided and hearing, such judge shall in bailable offenses continue, modify or set conditions of release upon the first of the following conditions of release found sufficient to provide reasonable assurance of the appearance of the accused in court: (1) Upon such person's execution of a written promise to appear, (2) upon such person's execution of a bond without surety in no greater amount than necessary, (3) upon such person's execution of a bond with surety in no greater amount than necessary.
(b) No hearing upon any such application shall be had until a copy of such application, together with a notice of the time and place of hearing thereon, has been served upon the surety or sureties upon such bond, if any, and upon the appropriate bail commissioner or intake, assessment and referral specialist employed by the Judicial Branch and, in the case of an application by an accused person, upon any such state's attorney, or, in the case of the application by any such state's attorney, upon the accused person.
(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (b) of this section, a hearing may be had on an application by any such state's attorney without a copy of such application and notice of the hearing being served upon the surety or sureties upon such bond, if any, the appropriate bail commissioner or intake, assessment and referral specialist and the accused person if the accused person is charged with the commission of a family violence crime, as defined in section 46b-38a, or a violation of section 53a-181c, 53a-181d, 53a-181e, 53a-223, 53a-223a or 53a-223b and is being presented at the next sitting of the Superior Court as required by section 54-1g.
(1949 Rev., S. 8790; 1961, P.A. 517, S. 72; 1967, P.A. 549, S. 13; 656, S. 61; P.A. 74-183, S. 147, 291; P.A. 76-436, S. 548, 681; P.A. 78-280, S. 1, 127; P.A. 80-313, S. 23; P.A. 99-186, S. 6; P.A. 02-127, S. 5; P.A. 12-114, S. 22; 12-133, S. 39.)
History: 1961 act substituted circuit court for court of common pleas; 1967 acts included bond without surety or written promise as alternative to bond with surety, effective October 1, 1968, and allowed presentation of application to judge at any time rather than only when court is not in session; P.A. 74-183 replaced circuit court with court of common pleas and added reference to judicial districts, effective December 31, 1974; P.A. 76-436 deleted specific mention of common pleas court and replaced references to prosecuting attorneys with references to state's attorneys and assistant state's attorneys, reflecting transfer of all trial jurisdiction to superior court, effective July 1, 1978; P.A. 78-280 deleted reference to counties; P.A. 80-313 restated provision to delete implication that judge has power to deny bail for bailable offenses if “he finds custody to be necessary to provide reasonable assurance of the appearance of the accused in court”; P.A. 99-186 inserted Subsec. indicators, added new Subsec. (c) to permit a hearing to be held on an application by a state's attorney without serving a copy of the application and notice of the hearing on the surety or sureties on the bond, the bail commissioner and the accused person, as required by Subsec. (b), if the accused person is charged with the commission of a family violence crime, as defined in Sec. 46b-38a, or a violation of Sec. 53a-110b, 53a-181c, 53a-181d or 53a-181e and is being presented at the next court date as required by Sec. 54-1g, and made technical changes for purposes of gender neutrality; P.A. 02-127 amended Subsec. (c) to include a violation of Sec. 53a-223b; P.A. 12-114 amended Subsec. (c) to add reference to violation of Sec. 53a-223a; P.A. 12-133 amended Subsecs. (b) and (c) by adding references to intake, assessment and referral specialist.
Bond includes recognizance. 110 C. 173. Cited. 140 C. 326; 222 C. 331; 241 C. 413.
Cited. 4 Conn. Cir. Ct. 116.
Notes of Decisions
State v. Fernando a., 981 A.2d 427 (Conn. 2009).
· cites it 28× “The court reasoned that "the defendant may at any time have the conditions of his release modified pursuant to General Statutes § 54-69. [14] At that time, the defendant is entitled to have a full hearing.”
State v. Ayala, 610 A.2d 1162 (Conn. 1992).
· cites it 2× “While released on bail prior to trial, a defendant is still within the constructive custody of the law. State v.”
Sanchez v. Doyle, 254 F. Supp. 2d 266 (D. Conn. 2003).
· cites it 2× “Pinaud involves a bah application made by a district attorney to increase bail that had already been set, and, as such, implicates a procedural stage subsequent to the one presented in this case but more analogous to the role of a Connecticut state’s attorney under Conn.…”
Hernandez v. Carbone, 567 F. Supp. 2d 320 (D. Conn. 2008).
· cites it 3× “Conn. Gen.Stat. § 54-69. Any person aggrieved by the court’s order concerning release or the bond, may petition the Connecticut Appellate Court for an expedited review of that order.”
State v. Doe, 765 A.2d 518 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2000).
· cites it 2× “In fact, the defendant in the present case had a hearing on a motion to dissolve the protective order on a date only twelve days after the original protective order was issued. The defendant’s due process rights, therefore, were not violated by the issuance of a protective order…”
State v. McDowell, 696 A.2d 977 (Conn. 1997).
· cites it 2× “The defendant, of course, is free to file in the trial court another motion for bond modification based on new evidence pursuant to General Statutes § 54-69. The bail commissioner recommended a bond of $50,000 in the first file and $25,000 in the second file.”
State v. Anderson (Conn. 2015).
· cites it 8× “Specifically, at any time following his transfer, the defendant could have filed a motion to modify the conditions of his release pursuant to General Statutes § 54-69 (a). In accordance with that provision, whenever any accused person believes that the amount of a bond imposed…”
State v. McCoy, 226 A.2d 116 (Conn. App. Ct. 1966).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 54-69. There is no error.”
Hernandez v. State, 38 A.3d 191 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012).
· cites it 2× “On April 6, 2005, the plaintiff submitted an application to the Superior Court pursuant to General Statutes § 54-69 seeking a reduction in bail to as low as the court deemed appropriate.”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-69(a) — 1 case
State v. Fernando a., 981 A.2d 427 (Conn. 2009).
“The court reasoned that "the defendant may at any time have the conditions of his release modified pursuant to General Statutes § 54-69. [14] At that time, the defendant is entitled to have a full hearing.”
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.