CT Gen Stat § 14-107 (2020)
2020 Connecticut General Statutes|Title 14 - Motor Vehicles. Use of the Highway by Vehicles. Gasoline|Chapter 246 - Motor Vehicles|Section 14-107 - Liability of owner, operator, lessee.

 (a) The owner, operator or lessee of any motor vehicle may be prosecuted jointly or individually for violation of any provision of section 10a-79, 10a-84, 10a-92 or 10a-139, subsection (a) of section 14-13, section 14-18, section 14-39 so far as it relates to the registration of motor vehicles, section 14-80, sections 14-80b, 14-80h, 14-80i and 14-99f, sections 14-96a to 14-96aa, inclusive, or section 14-228, 14-251, 14-252, 14-260 or 14-267a.(b) Whenever there occurs a violation of section 10a-79, 10a-92, 10a-139, 14-218a, 14-219, 14-222, 14-223, 14-224 or 14-253a, or sections 14-275 to 14-281, inclusive, or a violation of an ordinance, bylaw or regulation of any town, city or borough in regard to parking, proof of the registration number of any motor vehicle therein concerned shall be prima facie evidence in any criminal action or in any action based on an infraction that the owner was the operator thereof, except in the case of a leased or rented motor vehicle, such proof shall be prima facie evidence in any criminal action that the lessee was the operator thereof.(1949 Rev., S. 2452; 1953, S. 1342d; February, 1965, P.A. 448, S. 14; 1969, P.A. 469; 747, S. 4; 1971, P.A. 332, S. 1; P.A. 73-151, S. 4; 73-172; P.A. 75-198; P.A. 77-340, S. 3; P.A. 79-188, S. 6, 10; P.A. 82-138, S. 2; P.A. 84-128; 84-429, S. 61; P.A. 85-613, S. 31, 154; P.A. 92-126, S. 38, 48; P.A. 03-278, S. 43.)History: 1965 act deleted reference to Subsec. (a) or (b) before “section 14-80”; 1969 acts replaced reference to repealed Secs. 14-83 to 14-88 with reference to Secs. 14-96a to 14-96aa, included lessees in provisions, allowed prosecution jointly or individually and added exception re proof of registration number as evidence that lessee was operator; 1971 act included reference to Sec. 10-144; P.A. 73-151 added references to Secs. 10-38k, 10-108d and 10-109d; P.A. 73-172 added references to Secs. 13a-154 to 13a-162; P.A. 75-198 allowed prosecution for violation of “an ordinance, by law or regulation of any town, city or borough in regard to parking”; P.A. 77-340 added reference to actions based on infractions; P.A. 79-188 replaced reference to repealed Sec. 14-267 with reference to Sec. 14-267a; P.A. 82-138 included a reference to Sec. 14-253a; P.A. 84-128 included a reference to Sec. 14-223; P.A. 84-429 made technical changes for statutory consistency; P.A. 85-613 made technical changes; P.A. 92-126 removed references to repealed sections; P.A. 03-278 designated existing provisions as Subsecs. (a) and (b) and made technical changes, effective July 9, 2003.Inapplicable to civil action. 155 C. 222.Cited. 22 CS 389. Owner who has failed to use due care to prevent overloading under Sec. 14-267 is guilty even though he had no actual or constructive knowledge that vehicle was being overloaded. Id., 482. Cited. 23 CS 424; 30 CS 233.Shifting of burden of proof not a denial of due process re defendant. 2 Conn. Cir. Ct. 239. Trial court rejected defendant's rebuttal testimony re credibility. Id., 329. Cited. Id., 594. Statute as it relates to presumptive evidence does not violate due process since there is a rational and reasonable connection between the facts proved and the ultimate fact presumed, the prima facie inference raised being based on the common experience that as a general rule the owner of a car drives his own vehicle. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 462, 463. Cited. 4 Conn. Cir. Ct. 658. Either the operator or the owner of any motor vehicle, or both, may be prosecuted under section for violation of statute which punishes those who evade responsibility in motor vehicle operation, Sec. 14-224. 5 Conn. Cir. Ct. 561. Registration of motor vehicle being prima facie evidence as to the operator of an offending vehicle is constitutionally valid and does not violate the fourteenth amendment; fifth amendment protection against self-incrimination is not violated because it is not necessary for one to testify to rebut it. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 298.