Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 8.3-4

The defendant is charged [in count__] with evading responsibility in the operation of a motor

vehicle. The statute defining this offense reads in pertinent as follows:

each person operating a motor vehicle who is knowingly involved in an accident

which <insert appropriate subsection:>

• § 14-224 (a): results in the death of any other person

• § 14-224 (b) (1): causes serious physical injury to any other person

• § 14-224 (b) (2): causes physical injury to any other person

• § 14-224 (b) (3): causes injury or damage to property

shall at once stop and render such assistance as may be needed and shall give

(his/her) name, address and operator’s license number and registration number to (the

person injured / any officer or witness to the accident / the owner of the property).

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements

beyond a reasonable doubt: 1

Element 1 - Operated a motor vehicle

The first element is that the defendant operated a motor vehicle. “Motor vehicle” means all

vehicles used on a public highway and includes an automobile.

A person “operates” a motor vehicle within the meaning of the statute when, while in the vehicle,

such person intentionally does any act or makes use of any mechanical or electrical agency that

alone, or in sequence, will set in motion the motive power of the vehicle. A person acts

“intentionally” with respect to conduct when (his/her) conscious objective is to engage in such

conduct. <See Intent: General, Instruction 2.3-1.>

Element 2 - Knowingly involved in an accident

The second element is that the defendant was knowingly involved in an accident. It is only

necessary that the state prove that there had been an accident and the defendant knew of this

accident. It is not necessary that the state prove that the defendant had knowledge of any

resulting (injury to a person / injury or damage to property).

<See Knowledge, Instruction 2.3-3.>

Element 3 - Caused injury to person or damage to property

The third element is that the accident caused (death / serious physical injury to a person /

physical injury to a person / injury or damage to property). This means that the (death / physical

injury / injury or damage to property) was the result of the accident. <Insert appropriate

definitions:>

• “Physical injury” means impairment of physical condition or pain.

• “Serious physical injury” is something more serious than mere physical injury. It is more

than a minor or superficial injury. It is defined by statute as “physical injury that creates

a substantial risk of death, or that causes serious disfigurement, serious impairment of

health or serious loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ.”

Element 4 - Failed to stop, render assistance and provide information

The fourth element is that the defendant did not stop at once and render assistance as needed and

did not give (his/her) name, address, operator’s license number and registration number to either

the person injured, the owner of the property, a witness to the accident or an officer. If for any

reason or cause, the defendant was unable to provide the required information at the scene of the

accident, the law requires (him/her) to immediately report the accident to a law enforcement

officer or at the nearest police station.3

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) the defendant operated a

motor vehicle, 2) (he/she) knew that (he/she) had been involved in an accident, 3) the accident

caused (death / serious physical injury to a person / physical injury to a person / injury or damage

to property), and 4) the defendant did not stop at once and render assistance as needed and did

not give (his/her) name, address, operator’s license number and registration number to either the

person injured, the owner of the property, a witness to the accident or an officer.

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements

of evading responsibility, then you shall find the defendant guilty. On the other hand, if you

unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the

elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.

1 For a discussion of the elements, see State v. Goodspeed, 107 Conn. App. 717, 725-29, cert.

denied, 287 Conn. 920 (2008); State v. Rosario, 81 Conn. App. 621, 634, cert. denied, 268 Conn.

923 (2004); see also State v. Perkins, 271 Conn. 218, 258 n.37 (2004).

2 See State v. Johnson, 227 Conn. 534, 545 (1993).

3 The statute provides that a person may provide the necessary information to a law enforcement

officer at a location away from the scene of the accident if he or she is “unable for any reason or

cause” to do so at the scene. This does not relieve a person of the duty to stop at once and render

assistance. State v. Rosario, supra, 81 Conn. App. 627. “The essence of the offense of evading

responsibility is the failure of the driver to stop and render aid.” Id., 631. The Court in Rosario

noted that there may be situations in which “the operator’s emotional state and subsequent flight

from the scene are grounded in facts that could excuse his failure to stop.” Id., 628-29 n.4. If the

defendant claims that he or she left the scene of the accident in order to report the accident, the

court may want to emphasize in the discussion of this element that being unable to fulfill the

reporting requirements at the scene of the accident does not justify a failure to stop and render

assistance. See also State v. Lawson, 99 Conn. App. 233, 243-46 (court’s instruction accurately

defined the requirements of the statute), cert. denied, 282 Conn. 901 (2007).