(a) A person is guilty of manslaughter in the first degree when: (1) With intent to cause serious physical injury to another person, he causes the death of such person or of a third person; or (2) with intent to cause the death of another person, he causes the death of such person or of a third person under circumstances which do not constitute murder because he committed the proscribed act or acts under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance, as provided in subsection (a) of section 53a-54a, except that the fact that homicide was committed under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance constitutes a mitigating circumstance reducing murder to manslaughter in the first degree and need not be proved in any prosecution initiated under this subsection; or (3) under circumstances evincing an extreme indifference to human life, he recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person, and thereby causes the death of another person.

(b) Manslaughter in the first degree is a class B felony.

(1969, P.A. 828, S. 56; P.A. 73-137, S. 9; P.A. 83-486, S. 5.)

History: P.A. 73-137 substituted reference to Sec. 53a-54a for reference to Sec. 53a-54 in Subdiv. (2); P.A. 83-486 amended Subsec. (a)(2) by replacing “acts” with “committed the proscribed act or acts”.

Cited. 168 C. 610; 169 C. 309; 170 C. 81; 180 C. 171; 181 C. 406; 182 C. 66; 188 C. 542; 190 C. 639; 192 C. 85; 193 C. 632; Id., 646; Id., 695. Manslaughter is not a lesser included offense of felony murder. 196 C. 421. Cited. 200 C. 553; 201 C. 174; 202 C. 429; 210 C. 78; Id., 652; 211 C. 591; 213 C. 38; 215 C. 695; 216 C. 699; 217 C. 498; 223 C. 273; 225 C. 559; 226 C. 237; 233 C. 174; 234 C. 139; 236 C. 342. A conviction of reckless manslaughter pursuant to a robbery conspiracy is permitted under the Pinkerton doctrine because the commission of a reckless crime may be a reasonably foreseeable consequence of such conspiracy. 292 C. 296. While manslaughter in the first degree under this section is a lesser included offense of murder under Sec. 53a-54a despite the fact that the elements of manslaughter are not included in the elements of murder, the states of minds required by the two offenses are mutually exclusive; a jury finding guilty verdicts on both offenses are inconsistent verdicts and both verdicts must be vacated. 325 C. 236.

Cited. 7 CA 223; 8 CA 307; 15 CA 74; judgment reversed, see 211 C. 591; 16 CA 223; 24 CA 115; 37 CA 722; 40 CA 189; Id., 374; 41 CA 565; Id., 604; 42 CA 348; 44 CA 62; 46 CA 216.

Cited. 33 CS 28.

Subsec. (a):

Subdiv. (1): It is incumbent upon the state to prove a specific intent to cause serious physical injury as intent to achieve a result is an element of the crime charged. 165 C. 400. Cited. 174 C. 89; 176 C. 107. Subdiv. (3): The conduct proscribed does not require infliction of a physical blow. Id., 227. Cited. 177 C. 538; 179 C. 381. Subdivs. (1) and (3): Manslaughter is a lesser included offense of murder although the state of mind required is different. 180 C. 382. Cited. 181 C. 187; 182 C. 403; 183 C. 394; 185 C. 63; 188 C. 237; Id., 653. Subdiv. (1): Attempt to commit is not cognizable. 189 C. 303. Cited. 190 C. 219; Id., 576; 194 C. 119; Id., 279; Id., 376; Id., 408; 196 C. 519; 198 C. 53; Id., 209; Id., 220; Id., 273; Id., 454; 199 C. 155; Id., 383; Id., 417; 200 C. 224; Id., 453; 201 C. 534; Id., 598; 202 C. 520; Id., 520. Subdiv. (3): Not unconstitutionally vague as applied to defendant. Id., 629. Cited. 203 C. 466; 204 C. 120; 205 C. 279; 206 C. 278; 207 C. 276; 209 C. 133; 211 C. 441; 212 C. 612; 213 C. 500; Id., 579; 214 C. 57; Id., 77; 216 C. 220; 218 C. 766; 219 C. 16; 220 C. 169; Id., 285; 222 C. 444; 224 C. 546; 225 C. 55; 227 C. 456; Id., 566; Id., 611; 228 C. 118; Id., 147; Id., 281; 229 C. 193; Id., 397; 230 C. 183; 231 C. 115; Id., 484; 233 C. 106; Id., 215; Id., 517; 235 C. 413; Id., 473; Id., 595; 236 C. 189; 238 C. 253; Id., 313; 240 C. 395; Id., 727; Id., 743; Id., 799; 241 C. 502. Motion to dismiss on grounds that Subdiv. (3) is unconstitutionally vague because legislature failed to define phrases “extreme indifference to human life” and “grave risk of death” and defendant was not given “fair warning” and statute is susceptible to “arbitrary enforcement” fails to meet burden of proof because person of ordinary intelligence would have had fair warning that defendant's actions were proscribed and was properly denied by trial court; based on established principles concerning how evidence is construed, and the inferences reasonably drawn therefrom, evidence was sufficient to support trial court's verdict of manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm. 257 C. 544. Defendant who was convicted of murder pursuant to Sec. 53a-54a(a) was entitled to a jury instruction on the lesser included offense of manslaughter as set forth in Subdiv. (1). 262 C. 453.

Subdiv. (3): To be guilty of violating statute, a person must have the general intent to engage in the proscribed conduct. 5 CA 571. Cited. 7 CA 457; Id., 656; 8 CA 273; 9 CA 147; judgment reversed, see 206 C. 278; 11 CA 425; Id., 628; 13 CA 175; 17 CA 502; judgment reversed, see 213 C. 579; Id., 602; 18 CA 423; 19 CA 576; Id., 609; Id., 674; 20 CA 410; 21 CA 138; 22 CA 265; Id., 321; Id., 340; Id., 507; Id., 521; Id., 669; 23 CA 431; Id., 502; 24 CA 586; Id., 692; 25 CA 456; Id., 734; 26 CA 165; Id., 242; Id., 259; 27 CA 1; Id., 520; Id., 643; 28 CA 34; Id., 81; Id., 231; Id., 771; Id., 825; 29 CA 68; judgment reversed, see 227 C. 566; Id., 162; judgment reversed, see 229 C. 397; Id., 394; Id., 452; Id., 533; Id., 754; Id., 773; 30 CA 26; Id., 232; 31 CA 385; 32 CA 687; Id., 854; 33 CA 116; Id., 782; 34 CA 236; Id., 368, see also 233 C. 517; 35 CA 138; Id., 374; judgment reversed, see 235 C. 413; Id., 438; 37 CA 180; Id., 404; Id., 473; 38 CA 801; Id., 815; 39 CA 224; Id., 242; 40 CA 151; 41 CA 831; 42 CA 41; Id., 382; 43 CA 252; Id., 488; 44 CA 790; Id., 731. Evidence presented at trial concerning a healthy 1-year-old left in defendant's care was sufficient to support conviction. 47 CA 188. Subdiv. (1): Criminal liability as an accessory to manslaughter in the first degree has long been recognized under this state's jurisprudence. 49 CA 121. To be guilty under Subsec., it must be established that defendant must have had the general intent to engage in the proscribed conduct. 56 CA 742. Subdiv. (3): Action of defendant in entering house, after car chase, obtaining loaded shotgun, walking 100 feet to edge of driveway and shooting victim showed an extreme indifference to human life. 61 CA 463. Evidence insufficient to find that defendant demonstrated an extreme indifference to human life to support conviction of manslaughter in the first degree when defendant himself ingested fentanyl lollipops, there was no evidence that he or anyone to whom he had given the lollipops had an adverse reaction to them, risks associated with ingestion of methadose and fentanyl not commonly known by laypeople, and defendant immediately called 9-1-1 upon hearing the victim was unresponsive. 106 CA 467

Cited. 44 CS 417.