1996 Formal Opinions

Page 2 of 2

• Judge Aaron Ment, Supreme Court Building, 1996-011 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  Your office has posited several questions regarding the retroactive versus prospective application of Public Acts 96-63 and 96-79, which amend Conn. Gen. Stat. § 54-142a, commonly referred to as the Connecticut Erasure Statute. The primary effects of the amendments are to remove the category of transcripts of criminal trials from the types of records that are subject to erasure, and to delay the actual physical destruction of erased records.

• John Meeker, Chairman, Board of Parole, 1996-015 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  This letter responds to your request for advice concerning whether parole officers have authority to enforce conditions of parole with respect to parolees, Indians and nonIndians, on federal reservations.

• John F. Merchant, Esq., 1996-007 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  I have reviewed the relevant statutes applicable to your appointment as Consumer Counsel and the term of your office.

• John B. Meskill, Division of Special Revenue, 1996-009 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  In your letter of April 24, 1996, you seek our opinion as to whether the Connecticut General Statutes require that a local referendum be conducted whenever a new off-track betting facility is proposed to be operated by the Autotote Corporation in a municipality.

• Honorable Theodore S. Sergi, State Board of Education, 1996-019 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  In a letter to our office you ask us whether state law permits a local board of education of a town which does not maintain a high school to pay partially the tuition for a local student to attend a state approved high school other than the high school designated under Conn. Gen. Stat. ?-33.