An Act Strengthening Laws Concerning Evasion Of Police.
HB 6760 would increase criminal penalties across several motor-vehicle offenses involving evasion of police or failure to stop for law enforcement. The bill amends statutes covering negligent homicide with a motor vehicle, disobeying an officer’s signal, engaging a police officer in pursuit, evasion of responsibility, and misconduct with a motor vehicle resulting in death. In multiple instances, it would raise offenses to higher felony or misdemeanor classes and add mandatory prison terms, including mandatory minimum sentences where serious injury or death occurs.
More specifically, the proposal would make negligent homicide with a motor vehicle punishable as a class C or D felony with a mandatory sentence of three to five years. It would also increase penalties for disobeying an officer’s signal and for engaging police in pursuit, and would impose mandatory sentences of two years for serious injury and five years for death under the evasion-of-responsibility statute. For misconduct with a motor vehicle resulting in death, the bill would raise the offense to a class C or B felony with a five- to ten-year mandatory sentence, with the highest penalty applying when the victim is a police officer.
The bill would amend several provisions of the Connecticut General Statutes, primarily in Title 14 and related criminal sentencing provisions, by increasing offense classifications and adding mandatory minimum prison terms. Its practical effect would be to expand exposure to felony convictions and longer incarceration for drivers who flee, evade police, or cause injury or death in the course of such conduct. It would also create a special sentencing emphasis when the victim is a police officer.
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed as a public-safety and law-enforcement bill, with a punitive approach toward dangerous driving and police evasion. No committee transcript or vote record is available here, so there is no documented recorded debate or formal vote sentiment to assess. The overall tone of the proposal is strongly supportive of tougher criminal penalties.
The main point of contention likely concerns the bill’s use of higher felony classifications and mandatory minimum sentences, which can be controversial because they reduce judicial discretion and may lead to longer prison terms even in cases with varying levels of culpability. Supporters would likely emphasize deterrence, accountability, and protection of police officers and the public, while critics may question whether mandatory sentencing is the best response to pursuit-related offenses and whether the penalties are proportionate across different fact patterns, especially where no serious injury or death occurs.