Connecticut Statutes

§ 54-1p — Eyewitness identification procedures.

Connecticut § 54-1p
JurisdictionConnecticut
Title 54Criminal Procedure
Ch. 959Court Jurisdiction and Power

This text of Connecticut § 54-1p (Eyewitness identification procedures.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-1p (2026).

Text

(a)For the purposes of this section:
(1)“Eyewitness” means a person who observes another person at or near the scene of an offense;
(2)“Photo lineup” means a procedure in which an array of photographs, including a photograph of the person suspected as the perpetrator of an offense and additional photographs of other persons not suspected of the offense, is presented to an eyewitness for the purpose of determining whether the eyewitness is able to identify the suspect as the perpetrator;
(3)“Live lineup” means a procedure in which a group of persons, including the person suspected as the perpetrator of an offense and other persons not suspected of the offense, is presented to an eyewitness for the purpose of determining whether the eyewitness is able to identify the suspect as the perpe

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Legislative History

(P.A. 11-252, S. 1; P.A. 12-111, S. 1.) History: (Revisor's note: In Subsec. (b), “Department of Public Safety” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection” to conform with changes made by P.A. 11-51); P.A. 12-111 amended Subsec. (a) to replace “displayed” with “presented” in definitions of “photo lineup” and “live lineup”, added new Subsec. (b) re development and promulgation by February 1, 2013, of uniform mandatory policies and appropriate guidelines for conducting of eyewitness identification procedures and development and promulgation of standardized form and redesignated existing Subsec. (b) as Subsec. (c) and amended same to replace “January 1, 2012” with “May 1, 2013” as deadline for adopting lineup procedures and require such procedures to be in accordance with policies and guidelines developed and promulgated pursuant to Subsec. (b), add new Subdiv. (1) re presentation of photographs or persons sequentially, replace former Subdiv. (1) re conducting of procedure, when practicable, by person not aware of which person in lineup is suspected as perpetrator with new Subdiv. (2) re conducting of procedure in such a manner that person conducting procedure does not know which person in lineup is suspected as perpetrator and, if it is not practicable to conduct photo lineup in such a manner, allowing photo lineup to be conducted using a method so that person conducting procedure does not know which photograph eyewitness is viewing, redesignate existing Subdiv. (2) as Subdiv. (3) and amend same to add new Subpara. (A) re viewing of array of photographs or group of persons and presentation of photographs or persons one at a time, add new Subpara. (B) re importance of excluding innocent persons, add new Subpara. (C) re difference in appearance because of change in features like facial or head hair, redesignate existing Subparas. (A) to (C) as Subparas. (D) to (F) and add new Subpara. (G) re continuation of police investigation, add new Subdiv. (4) re giving of additional instructions developed and promulgated pursuant to Subsec. (b), redesignate existing Subdivs. (3) to (11) as Subdivs. (5) to (13), redesignate existing Subdiv. (12) as Subdiv. (14) and amend same to replace “eyewitness's statement that he or she is certain of the selection” with “eyewitness's statement regarding how certain he or she is of the selection” and redesignate existing Subdiv. (13) as Subdiv. (15) and amend same by replacing in Subpara. (D) “the photographs themselves” with “the photographs presented to the eyewitness or copies thereof”, effective July 1, 2012. Defendant's state constitutional right to due process not violated where police deviated from section requirements; procedures in section are best practices but not constitutionally mandated and state presented ample evidence of both system and estimator variables that support a determination that the photo identification was reliable. 218 CA 555.

Nearby Sections

15
View on official source ↗

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Connecticut § 54-1p, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ct/54-1p.