If the court instructs the jury on a defense of mental disease or defect raised pursuant to section
53a-13, it shall, unless the defendant affirmatively objects, inform the jury of the consequences for the defendant if he is found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect and of the confinement and release provisions of sections
17a-580 to
17a-602, inclusive, applicable to a person found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect.
(P.A. 81-301, S. 3; P.A. 83-486, S. 6; P.A. 85-506, S. 30, 32.)
History: P.A. 83-486 replaced provision re court instructing jury “on the absence of criminal responsibility of a defendant on the grounds of mental disease or defect” with instruction “on a defense of mental disease or defect raised pursuant to section 53a-13”, and replaced “a finding of guilty but not criminally responsible” with a finding of “not guilty by reason” of mental disease or defect; P.A. 85-506 replaced reference to repealed Sec. 53a-47 with sections 17-257a to 17-257w, inclusive.
Cited. 208 C. 125; 230 C. 183.
Cited. 10 CA 50. Section enacted in derogation of common law and is to be construed narrowly; court's instructions satisfied section where effect was to inform jury of consequences of a successful insanity defense and to allay jurors' fears that defendant could be released while a danger to society. 50 CA 312.
Secs. 54-90 and 54-90a. Transferred to Chapter 961a, Secs. 54-142a and 54-142b, respectively.
PART II
SENTENCING AND APPEAL
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases, 1987–2014 · leading case:
State v. Wood, 545 A.2d 1026 (Conn. 1988).
State v. Wood, 545 A.2d 1026 (Conn. 1988).
· cites it 11× “The trial court is required by General Statutes § 54-89a to inform the jury of the consequences for the defendant of this verdict, including the confinement and release provisions of General Statutes (Rev.”
State v. Ross, 646 A.2d 1318 (Conn. 1994).
· cites it 5× “Also in connection with the defense of mental disease or defect, the trial court instructed the jury, in accordance with the provisions of General Statutes § 54-89a, 15 concerning the consequences of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity.”
State v. Cole, 718 A.2d 457 (Conn. App. Ct. 1998).
· cites it 10× “General Statutes § 54-89a provides in relevant part: “If the court instructs the jury on a defense of mental disease or defect .”
State v. Daskam, 521 A.2d 587 (Conn. App. Ct. 1987).
· cites it 4× “From the judgment of conviction, the defendant has appealed claiming (1) that the court erred in refusing to allow the defendant to present testimony that the complaining witness had made prior statements which were inconsistent with his testimony, and (2) that the court did not…”
State v. Shenkman (Conn. App. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 11× “’’ General Statutes § 54-89a mandates the inclusion of such a charge on the consequences of an acquittal due to mental disease or defect.”
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.