Connecticut OUI Defense and Administrative Per Se Hearing Package

CONNECTICUT OUI DEFENSE AND ADMINISTRATIVE PER SE HEARING PACKAGE

Charge: Operating Under the Influence — C.G.S. § 14-227a
Defendant / Licensee: [_________________________________]
Date of Arrest: [__/__/____]
Docket No.: [_________________________________]
Arresting Agency / Officer: [_________________________________]
Court: Superior Court, G.A. [____] / J.D. of [____________________]

TIME-SENSITIVE — PER SE HEARING DEADLINE: The Administrative Per Se suspension notice from DMV gives the licensee 7 days from the mailing date of the suspension notice to request a hearing (C.G.S. § 14-227b(g)). Without a timely request, the 45-day suspension and mandatory IID period are imposed automatically. Confirm current deadline on the notice; do not rely on prior 30-day rule.

PART 1 — CONNECTICUT OUI / IMPLIED CONSENT OVERVIEW

1.1 Elements — C.G.S. § 14-227a(a)

A person commits OUI by operating a motor vehicle:

• ☐ While under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug or both; OR
• ☐ While having an elevated blood alcohol content (BAC), defined as:

1.2 Criminal Penalties — C.G.S. § 14-227a(g)

1.3 License Suspension — C.G.S. § 14-227a(g)

Court conviction triggers separate license suspension (in addition to the per se administrative action), followed by mandatory IID under § 14-227j.

1.4 Administrative Per Se Suspension — C.G.S. § 14-227b

PART 2 — REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PER SE HEARING

(C.G.S. § 14-227b — Department of Motor Vehicles)

TO: State of Connecticut, Department of Motor Vehicles
Administrative Per Se Unit
60 State Street, Wethersfield, CT 06161
Phone: (860) 263-5204

Licensee: [________________________________]
Operator License No.: [____________] DOB: [__/__/____]
Arrest Date: [__/__/____] Arresting Agency: [____________________]
Notice of Suspension Date (per DMV mailing): [__/__/____]

I, the undersigned, hereby request a hearing under C.G.S. § 14-227b to contest the proposed license suspension. This request is timely under the deadline stated on the Notice of Suspension.

Issues to be Determined at Hearing — C.G.S. § 14-227b(g):

The hearing is limited to four issues. Counsel must check each contested issue:

1. ☐ Did the police officer have probable cause to arrest the licensee for OUI under § 14-227a, § 14-227m, or § 14-227n?
2. ☐ Was the licensee placed under arrest?
3. ☐ Did the licensee refuse to submit to such test or did the licensee submit to such test and the test results indicated an elevated blood alcohol content?
4. ☐ Was the licensee operating a motor vehicle at the time of the alleged offense?

Format Requested:

• ☐ In-person hearing at DMV Wethersfield (or designated regional location)
• ☐ Telephonic / videoconference per current DMV rule
• ☐ Subpoena of arresting officer requested

Counsel: [_______________________] Juris No. [______]
Address / Phone / Email: [_______________________]

Date submitted: [__/__/____] Method: ☐ Mail ☐ Fax ☐ Online portal

PART 3 — DEFENSES AT PER SE HEARING — CHECKLIST

3.1 Probable Cause (Issue 1)

• ☐ No articulable reason for initial stop (lane drift within marked lanes; State v. Anderson, 24 Conn. App. 438)
• ☐ Stop unlawfully prolonged (Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348)
• ☐ Field sobriety tests unreliable / improperly administered / lack of NHTSA compliance
• ☐ Officer's A-44 form facially insufficient
• ☐ Officer's report omits required observations of impairment

3.2 Lawful Arrest (Issue 2)

• ☐ No formal arrest occurred before test request
• ☐ Arresting officer lacked statutory authority / jurisdiction
• ☐ Arrest not contemporaneous with test request

3.3 Refusal or Elevated BAC (Issue 3)

• ☐ Defendant did not refuse — attempted compliance / equipment failure / medical inability
• ☐ Defendant was not afforded reasonable opportunity to telephone counsel before deciding — § 14-227b(b)(B)
• ☐ Statutorily required warning was not given
• ☐ Two-test rule not followed — § 14-227a(b)(5) (10-minute spacing)
• ☐ Instrument was not approved by DESPP / not properly calibrated — Regs. Conn. State Agencies § 14-227a-1 et seq.
• ☐ Operator not certified
• ☐ Test commenced more than 2 hours after operation — § 14-227a(b)(6)
• ☐ Mathematical discrepancy between tests not properly resolved

3.4 Operation (Issue 4)

• ☐ Defendant was not operating — vehicle parked, key in ignition only, or no movement
• ☐ Operation occurred on private property not constituting a "public highway" or "premises generally open to the public" (relevant under State v. Boucher, 207 Conn. 612 (1988))
• ☐ Defendant was passenger, not operator

PART 4 — DEMAND FOR DISCOVERY

(Practice Book §§ 40-7 – 40-13; Brady v. Maryland)

TO: Office of the State's Attorney, [G.A./J.D.] of [______], Connecticut

Defendant demands, under Connecticut Practice Book §§ 40-7 to 40-13, Art. First, §§ 7, 8, 9 of the Connecticut Constitution, Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972):

1. ☐ Information on all witnesses State intends to call — § 40-13(a)
2. ☐ Written or recorded statements of Defendant
3. ☐ All police reports, supplements, and incident narratives
4. ☐ Books, papers, documents, photographs, tangible objects — § 40-11(a)(4)
5. ☐ Results / reports of physical or mental examinations and scientific tests:
   - ☐ Breath-test result printout (Intoximeter EC/IR II)
   - ☐ 15-minute pre-test observation log (Regs. § 14-227a-10)
   - ☐ Calibration / accuracy-verification records (Regs. § 14-227a-11)
   - ☐ Certificate of breath-test operator (DESPP)
   - ☐ Simulator solution lot numbers and certifications
   - ☐ Blood draw chain of custody, lab notes, GC chromatograms, retention records
   - ☐ DRE 12-step protocol (if drug DUI)
6. ☐ A-44 form ("Report of Refusal/Failure")
7. ☐ Standardized Field Sobriety Test scoresheet and officer's NHTSA certification
8. ☐ Body-worn-camera and dash-camera video
9. ☐ CAD / dispatch logs and 911 audio
10. ☐ Brady / Giglio impeachment material on the arresting officer
11. ☐ Witness list

Response deadline: [__/__/____]

PART 5 — MOTION TO SUPPRESS

SUPERIOR COURT — JUDICIAL DISTRICT / G.A. OF [____________________]

Docket No.: [____________]

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

(Practice Book § 41-12)

Defendant moves the Court under Connecticut Practice Book § 41-12, Art. First, §§ 7, 8, 9 of the Connecticut Constitution, and the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, to suppress:

• ☐ All evidence flowing from the traffic stop for lack of reasonable and articulable suspicion (State v. Lamme, 216 Conn. 172 (1990))
• ☐ Evidence obtained after unlawful prolongation of stop (Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015))
• ☐ Statements obtained in violation of Miranda / Art. First, § 8 (State v. Lapointe, 237 Conn. 694 (1996))
• ☐ Breath-test results for non-compliance with § 14-227a(b) and Regs. Conn. State Agencies §§ 14-227a-1 – 14-227a-15
• ☐ Test result for failure of 2-hour window — § 14-227a(b)(6)
• ☐ Failure of the 10-minute / two-test requirement — § 14-227a(b)(5)
• ☐ Blood-test results obtained without warrant or valid consent (Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141 (2013); Birchfield v. North Dakota, 579 U.S. 438 (2016); Mitchell v. Wisconsin, 588 U.S. ___ (2019); State v. Brunetti, 279 Conn. 39 (2006))
• ☐ Field sobriety test results not administered per NHTSA standards
• ☐ Evidence obtained after denial of right to counsel before chemical testing decision — § 14-227b(b)(B)

Grounds (fact-specific): [_________________________________]

Relief requested: Order suppressing the foregoing evidence and any derivative fruits.

Date: [__/__/____] [COUNSEL] Juris No. [______]

PART 6 — SPECIAL OPERATOR'S PERMIT PETITION

(C.G.S. § 14-37a — Work / Education / Medical Permit)

TO: State of Connecticut, Department of Motor Vehicles
Petitioner: [____________________] OLN: [____________] DOB: [__/__/____]

A licensee whose driving privileges are suspended (including OUI/per se suspension) may apply for a Special Operator's Permit under § 14-37a permitting limited driving for employment, education, medical treatment, or other authorized purposes during the suspension period.

Statutory eligibility:

• ☐ Suspension is among classes eligible under § 14-37a (verify current list; OUI/per se eligible after IID installed)
• ☐ Petitioner is not a CDL holder driving commercial vehicle for the underlying offense
• ☐ Application fee paid
• ☐ Ignition Interlock Device installed and active under § 14-227j (where required)
• ☐ Petitioner has no separate disqualification
• ☐ Petitioner has insurance/financial responsibility on file

Purposes:

• ☐ Travel to/from employment — Employer: [____________________] Hours: [____________________]
• ☐ Travel in scope of employment
• ☐ Travel to/from education — School: [____________________]
• ☐ Travel to/from medical treatment for petitioner or family member
• ☐ Travel to/from court-ordered substance-abuse treatment
• ☐ Other (specify): [____________________]

Vehicles to be operated:

Petitioner verifies under penalty of false statement (C.G.S. § 53a-157b) that the foregoing is true. Date: [__/__/____]

PART 7 — PLEA-DEAL EVALUATION WORKSHEET

Possible negotiated outcomes:

• ☐ Pretrial Alcohol Education Program (AEP) — § 54-56g (10 or 15 sessions + VIP); 1-year period; dismissal on completion
• ☐ Suspended Prosecution drug-treatment program (§ 17a-693 et seq.) where drug-related
• ☐ Amendment to Reckless Driving (C.G.S. § 14-222) — fact-dependent; "wet reckless" sometimes available
• ☐ Conditional plea preserving suppression issue
• ☐ Nolle prosequi (dismissal after 13 months)
• ☐ Plea to OUI with min penalties + IID

Collateral consequences checklist:

• ☐ CDL — 1 yr disqualification (1st) / lifetime (2nd) — 49 CFR § 383.51
• ☐ Immigration (Padilla v. Kentucky)
• ☐ Professional licensing reporting
• ☐ Insurance / SR-22
• ☐ Federal employment / security clearance
• ☐ Firearm rights (3rd+ OUI is Class D felony exposure)
• ☐ Auto insurance premium increase
• ☐ Out-of-state reciprocal action through Driver License Compact

Defendant: [____________________] Date: [__/__/____]
Counsel: [____________________] Date: [__/__/____]

PART 8 — IMPLIED CONSENT SUMMARY (Client Handout)

By operating a motor vehicle in Connecticut, you have given implied consent to chemical testing of your blood, breath, or urine — and the nontestimonial portion of a DRE evaluation — under C.G.S. § 14-227b.

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Connecticut General Statutes Title 14, Chapter 248 (Vehicle Highway Use): https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/title_14.htm
• Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies §§ 14-227a-1 – 14-227a-15 (Breath/Blood Testing)
• Connecticut DMV — Administrative Per Se: https://portal.ct.gov/DMV
• Connecticut Practice Book (Criminal Procedure) §§ 40-7 – 40-13, 41-12
• State v. Lamme, 216 Conn. 172 (1990)
• State v. Boucher, 207 Conn. 612 (1988)
• State v. Brunetti, 279 Conn. 39 (2006)
• State v. Lapointe, 237 Conn. 694 (1996)
• Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141 (2013); Birchfield v. North Dakota, 579 U.S. 438 (2016); Mitchell v. Wisconsin, 588 U.S. ___ (2019)