Sec. 12-565. Power to administer oaths and take testimony. Subpoena.
Sec. 12-565. Power to administer oaths and take testimony. Subpoena. The
executive director or the board may conduct any inquiry, investigation or hearing necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter. The executive director or any board
member shall have power to administer oaths and take testimony under oath concerning
the matter of inquiry or investigation. At any hearing ordered, the executive director,
the board or an agent authorized by law to issue such process may subpoena witnesses
and require the production of records, papers and documents pertinent to such inquiry.
No witness under subpoena issued under the provisions of this section shall be excused
from testifying or from producing records, papers or documents on the ground that such
testimony or the production of such records or other documentary evidence would tend
to incriminate him, but such evidence or the records or papers so produced shall not be
used in any criminal proceeding against him. If any person disobeys such process or,
having appeared in obedience thereto, refuses to answer any pertinent question put to
him or to produce any records and papers pursuant thereto, the executive director or
board may apply to the superior court for the judicial district of Hartford or for the
judicial district wherein the person resides or wherein the business has been conducted,
or to any judge of said court if the same is not in session, setting forth such disobedience
to process or refusal to answer. Said court or such judge shall cite such person to appear
before said court or such judge to answer such question or to produce such records
and papers and, upon his refusal to do so, shall commit such person to a community
correctional center until he testifies, but not for a longer period than sixty days. Notwithstanding the serving of the term of such commitment by any person, the executive
director or board may proceed with such inquiry and examination as if the witness had
not previously been called upon to testify. Officers who serve subpoenas issued by the
executive director or the board or under his or its authority and witnesses attending
hearings conducted hereunder shall receive the same fees and compensation as officers
and witnesses in the courts of this state to be paid on vouchers of the division on order
of the Comptroller. The executive director may delegate the powers granted to him
under this section to each or any one of the unit heads appointed by him in accordance
with section 12-559, to any assistant unit head or the deputy or executive assistant to
the executive director.
(1971, P.A. 865, S. 9; 1972, P.A. 187, S. 3; June, 1972, P.A. 1, S. 5; P.A. 78-280, S. 2, 6, 127; P.A. 79-404, S. 16, 45;
P.A. 88-230, S. 1, 12; P.A. 90-98, S. 1, 2; P.A. 93-142, S. 4, 7, 8; 93-325; P.A. 95-220, S. 4-6.)
History: 1972 acts substituted "subcommittee" for "agent", "or" for "and" and "community correctional center" for
"jail"; P.A. 78-280 substituted judicial districts for counties and the judicial district of Hartford-New Britain for Hartford
county; P.A. 79-404 gave powers and duties formerly held by commission to executive director and gaming policy board
or its members and allowed executive director to delegate powers to unit heads; P.A. 88-230 replaced "judicial district of
Hartford-New Britain" with "judicial district of Hartford", effective September 1, 1991; P.A. 90-98 changed the effective
date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1991, to September 1, 1993; P.A. 93-142 changed the effective date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1993, to September 1, 1996, effective June 14, 1993; P.A. 93-325 permitted executive director to
delegate to any assistant unit head or the deputy or executive assistant to executive director the power to conduct inquiries,
investigations or hearings; P.A. 95-220 changed the effective date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1996, to September
1, 1998, effective July 1, 1995.
Statute adequately protects witness against the use of his testimony by federal prosecutors, but is unconstitutional
because it violates witness' right against self-incrimination by failing to prohibit the use against the immunized witness
of evidence derived from his compelled testimony. 35 CS 105.