Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 8.6-2

The defendant is charged [in count__] with riot in the second degree. The statute defining this

offense reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of riot in the second degree when, simultaneously with two or more

other persons, he engages in tumultuous and violent conduct and thereby

(intentionally / recklessly) (causes / creates a grave risk of causing) public alarm.

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

beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Tumultuous and violent conduct

The first element is that the defendant engaged in tumultuous and violent conduct that involved

physical violence or portended imminent physical violence.

1 “Imminent” means impending or

likely to occur immediately.

Element 2 - Two or more other persons

The second element is that (he/she) did so simultaneously with two or more other persons.

Element 3 - Intent

The third element is that the defendant

• acted with the intent to (cause / create a grave risk of causing) public alarm. A person

acts “intentionally” with respect to a result when (his/her) conscious objective is to cause

such result. <See Intent: Specific, Instruction 2.3-1.>

• recklessly (caused / created a grave risk of causing) public alarm. A person acts

“recklessly” with respect to a result or circumstances when (he/she) is aware of and

consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that such result will occur or

that such circumstances exist. <See Recklessness, Instruction 2.3-4.>

“Alarm” means a fear caused by the sudden realization of danger. “Public alarm” is when such a

fear is created in a public area and affects a large number of people in that area.

Conclusion

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

tumultuous and violent conduct, 2) (he/she) did so simultaneously with two or more other

persons, and 3) (he/she) (intentionally / recklessly) (caused / created a grave risk of causing)

public alarm.

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

of riot in the second degree, 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 In State v. Indrisano, 228 Conn. 795, 811-12 (1994), a case that involved the disorderly

conduct statute, § 53a-182 (a), the court construed the phrase “[e]ngages in fighting or in violent,

tumultuous or threatening behavior” to refer to physical action. See Disorderly Conduct,

Instruction 8.4-8.