(a) The party accused in a criminal action in the Superior Court may demand a trial by jury of issues which are triable of right by a jury. There is no right to trial by jury in criminal actions where the maximum penalty is a fine of one hundred ninety-nine dollars or in any matter involving violations payable through the Centralized Infractions Bureau where the maximum penalty is a fine of five hundred dollars or less.
(b) In criminal proceedings the judge shall advise the accused of his right to trial by jury at the time he is put to plea and, if the accused does not then claim a jury, his right thereto shall be deemed waived, but if a judge acting on motion made by the accused within ten days after judgment finds that such waiver was made when the accused was not fully cognizant of his rights or when, in the opinion of the judge, the proper administration of justice requires it, the judge shall vacate the judgment and cause the proceeding to be set for jury trial.
(c) In any criminal trial by a jury, except as otherwise provided by law, such trial shall be by a jury of six.
(P.A. 80-313, S. 35; P.A. 86-227; P.A. 87-241; May Sp. Sess. P.A. 92-6, S. 82, 117.)
History: P.A. 86-227 provided that “The party accused”, rather than “Any party”, may demand a jury trial and increased from $99 to $199 the maximum fine threshold for a jury trial; P.A. 87-241 amended Subsec. (a) by deleting reference to maximum penalty of sentence of 30 days or penalty consisting of both fine and imprisonment; May Sp. Sess. P.A. 92-6 amended Subsec. (a) to provide that there is no right to trial by jury in any matter involving violations payable through the centralized infractions bureau where the maximum penalty is a fine of $500 or less.
See Sec. 51-180 re criminal terms and sessions of court.
See Sec. 51-180a re special session held when an accused is confined for want of bail.
Right to jury trial discussed. 188 C. 697. Cited. 190 C. 639; 191 C. 506; 197 C. 247; 198 C. 77; 201 C. 489; 205 C. 456; 222 C. 591; 223 C. 384; 225 C. 355; 226 C. 618.
Cited. 9 CA 255; 10 CA 692; 39 CA 702; 41 CA 454; 46 CA 486. When defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waives right to a jury trial and is subsequently charged with additional crimes, if defendant again elects to waive right to a jury trial, defendant cannot complain on appeal that election for a court trial to the additional charges was compromised. 145 CA 767.
Subsec. (a):
Statute does not violate right to trial by jury under federal or state constitutions. 5 CA 434. Cited. 12 CA 481; 14 CA 816.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
38
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1982–2024 · leading case:
State v. Shockley, 453 A.2d 441 (Conn. 1982).
State v. Shockley, 453 A.2d 441 (Conn. 1982).
· cites it 35× “He argues that he was entitled to a trial by jury under the sixth and fourteenth amendments to the United States constitution, under article first, § 8, of the Connecticut constitution, and under General Statutes § 54-82b. [11] *705 Furthermore, he claims that the mandatory…”
Wilson v. Cohen, 610 A.2d 1177 (Conn. 1992).
· cites it 20× “The sole issue is whether the plaintiff is entitled to a jury trial pursuant to General Statutes § 54-82b. 1 Because we conclude that the plaintiff is not entitled to a jury trial, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.”
State v. Rizzo, 31 A.3d 1094 (Conn. 2011).
· cites it 10× “Furthermore, at no time during the penalty phase proceedings that followed the waiver did the defendant or his counsel move to revoke that waiver, or attempt to introduce any evidence that might have called its effectiveness into question. Finally, after the panel's imposition…”
State v. Goffe, 676 A.2d 1377 (Conn. App. Ct. 1996).
· cites it 24× “4 On his jury trial claim, the defendant also invokes General Statutes § 54-82b 5 as well as Prac *459 tice Book § 839, and on his waiver of the right to counsel claim he also refers to Practice Book § 961.”
State v. Woods, 4 A.3d 236 (Conn. 2010).
· cites it 12× “Specifically, the defendant asserts that the trial court violated General Statutes § 54-82b (b) 4 by informing the defendant that once the court accepted his waiver of a jury trial after the canvass, he would not be able to change his mind and return to his original decision to…”
State v. Tocco, 993 A.2d 989 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 8× “The defendant argues that the statements of this nature were legally improper in that they contradict General Statutes § 54-82b (b) 6 and Practice Book § 42-1.”
State v. Marino, 462 A.2d 1021 (Conn. 1983).
· cites it 6× “It should be noted that the defendant makes no claim that the procedures set forth *643 in Practice Book § 839 3 and General Statutes § 54-82b 4 concerning waiver of a jury trial were not followed.”
State v. Crump, 518 A.2d 378 (Conn. 1986).
· cites it 6× “The defendant also claims that the trial court erred both in “assuming” that his waiver of his right to a jury trial was knowingly and voluntarily made and in accepting his election of a court trial in violation of his rights under the sixth amendment 12 to the United *498…”
State v. Weisser, 518 A.2d 655 (Conn. App. Ct. 1986).
· cites it 12× “3 A person charged with an infraction is not entitled to a jury trial under General Statutes § 54-82b. 4 The use of an information to charge an offense not other *257 wise entitled to a trial by jury does not thereby entitle a defendant to a trial by jury, despite the provisions…”
State v. Williams, 534 A.2d 230 (Conn. 1987).
· cites it 4× “General Statutes § 54-82b; Practice Book §§ 839, 4185; State v.”
State v. Ouellette, 859 A.2d 907 (Conn. 2004).
· cites it 4× “20 In rejecting this claim, we stated: *756 “Both General Statutes § 54-82b (b) and [what is now] Practice Book § [42-1] 21 require that the judge advise the defendant at the time he pleads of his right to a trial by jury.”
State v. Lo Sacco, 531 A.2d 184 (Conn. App. Ct. 1987).
· cites it 5× “2d 1207 (1986); see also General Statutes § 54-82b (a). We have recently held that the defendant has no right to a jury trial when he is charged with the infraction of creating a public disturbance.”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-82b(b) — 1 case
State v. Shockley, 453 A.2d 441 (Conn. 1982).
“He argues that he was entitled to a trial by jury under the sixth and fourteenth amendments to the United States constitution, under article first, § 8, of the Connecticut constitution, and under General Statutes § 54-82b. [11] *705 Furthermore, he claims that the mandatory…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-82b(c) — 1 case
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.