Conn. Gen. Stat. ยง 54-82c
(1957, P.A. 551, S. 1; 1961, P.A. 465; 1963, P.A. 642, S. 79; P.A. 73-116, S. 14; 73-667, S. 1, 2; P.A. 74-183, S. 156, 291; P.A. 76-436, S. 558, 681; P.A. 80-313, S. 37; June Sp. Sess. P.A. 98-1, S. 74, 121; P.A. 04-234, S. 2.)
Annotations to former section 54-139: Phrase “has caused to be delivered” is equivalent of “has delivered” and 120-day period runs from completion of delivery of both request and supplemental information. 149 C. 250. Cited. 153 C. 28. Statute permits court to grant continuance for good cause shown even where facts which lead court to grant continuance are beyond defendant’s control. 171 C. 487. Cited. 185 C. 118; 194 C. 297; 198 C. 573. Cited. 40 CA 757. Does not apply to prisoner in federal institution in Connecticut; does not purport to place a limit on time within which information should be made. 24 CS 308. Cited. 36 CS 327, 330. Annotations to present section: Cited. 193 C. 270; 194 Conn. 297; 197 C. 166; 198 Conn. 573; 202 C. 93; 221 C. 921; 224 C. 163; 242 Conn. 409. Cited. 12 CA 1; 14 CA 244; Id., 493; 20 CA 205; 26 CA 698; 28 CA 195; 29 CA 694; 32 CA 38; 33 CA 184; judgment reversed, see 232 C. 707; 40 Conn.App. 757. In absence of any evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that officials acted properly under statute and therefore, because written notice was not delivered to state’s attorney, the statutory 120-day period did not commence. 107 CA 517. For purposes of speedy trial calculations, delays attributable to initiations of the defense are excludable. 110 CA 245. Time limits under section excluded entire period of time during which defendant’s competency claim was considered and resolved. 132 CA 24.