Criminal Jury Instructions Home

6.5-6  Unlawful Restraint in the Second Degree -- § 53a-96

Revised to December 1, 2007

The defendant is charged [in count __] with unlawful restraint in the second degree.  The statute defining this offense reads in pertinent part as follows: 

a person is guilty of unlawful restraint in the second degree when (he/she) restrains another person.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Restraint
The first element is that the defendant restrained <insert name of restrained person>.  "Restrain" means to intentionally restrict a person's movements in such a manner that it interferes substantially with (his/her) liberty by <insert as appropriate:>

• moving (him/her) from one place to another.

• confining (him/her) in some place.  This could be either the place where the restraint began or in a place to which (he/she) has been moved.

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.> 

Element 2 - Without consent
The second element is that <insert name of person> did not consent to the restraint.  <Insert as appropriate:>

• <If person abducted is an adult:>  "Without consent" includes, but is not limited to, deception by the defendant.

• <If person abducted in less than sixteen or an incompetent person:>  Without consent in this case means by any means whatever,¹ including acquiescence of the person, if (he/she) is (a child less than sixteen years old / an incompetent person) and (the parent or guardian / person or institution having lawful control or custody of (him/her)) has not acquiesced in the movement or confinement.

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant 1) intentionally restrained <insert name of restrained person> and 2) did so without (his/her) consent.

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements of the crime of unlawful restraint 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 The "any means whatever" language was intended "to protect young children and incompetent persons from being kidnapped when the victim agrees to go with the kidnapper because of promises of favors or gifts.  A competent adult's actual consent to the restraint would negate lack of consent if not induced by deception, force, fear or shock; in other words, with no compulsion or deception. . . .  The 'any means whatever' language should not be given in an instruction when . . . the victim is a competent adult."  State v. Benjamin, 86 Conn. App. 344, 355 (2004).