[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":3,"doc-seo-278748-105":53,"doc-detail-278748-en":119},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,14,19,24,29,34,39,44,49],{"id":8,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":11,"show_sort_weight":12,"slug":13},11,1,"Template","Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":15,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":16,"show_sort_weight":17,"slug":18},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":20,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":21,"show_sort_weight":22,"slug":23},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":25,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":26,"show_sort_weight":27,"slug":28},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":30,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":31,"show_sort_weight":32,"slug":33},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":35,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":36,"show_sort_weight":37,"slug":38},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":40,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":41,"show_sort_weight":42,"slug":43},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":45,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":46,"show_sort_weight":47,"slug":48},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":50,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":51,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":52},158,"General","general-158",{"code":4,"msg":54,"data":55},"ok",{"site_id":56,"language":57,"slug":58,"title":59,"keywords":60,"description":61,"schema_data":62,"social_meta":112,"head_meta":114,"extra_data":116,"updated_unix":118},105,"en","hb-6633-bill-for-just-enforcement-of-address-verifications","HB 6633 - Bill for Just Enforcement of Address Verifications","","One Standard of Justice fact sheet argues against Connecticut’s strict enforcement of address verifications for individuals on the state’s sex offense registry. It explains a quarterly confirmation process, a 10-day receipt deadline, and how failure is treated as a Class D felony. The page contends enforcement is inconsistent, late or lost paperwork often leads to convictions, and strict liability can cause severe harm, including incarceration, employment loss, court burdens, and disproportionate impacts on Black communities and especially homeless people.",{"@graph":63,"@context":111},[64,80,102],{"@type":65,"itemListElement":66},"BreadcrumbList",[67,71,74,77],{"item":68,"name":69,"@type":70,"position":9},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":72,"name":10,"@type":70,"position":73},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/",2,{"item":75,"name":41,"@type":70,"position":76},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/letters/",3,{"item":78,"name":59,"@type":70,"position":79},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/hb-6633-bill-for-just-enforcement-of-address-verifications/278748/",4,{"url":78,"name":59,"@type":81,"image":82,"author":87,"headline":59,"publisher":90,"fileFormat":93,"inLanguage":57,"description":61,"dateModified":94,"datePublished":95,"encodingFormat":93,"isAccessibleForFree":96,"interactionStatistic":97},"DigitalDocument",{"url":83,"@type":84,"width":85,"height":86},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/hb-6633-bill-for-just-enforcement-of-address-verifications/278748.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":88,"@type":89},"Aldword","Person",{"url":68,"name":91,"@type":92},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-18","2026-09-15",true,{"@type":98,"interactionType":99,"userInteractionCount":101},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":100},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":103,"mainEntity":104},"FAQPage",[105],{"name":106,"@type":107,"acceptedAnswer":108},"What changes does the bill advocate?","Question",{"text":109,"@type":110},"It proposes allowing judicial discretion to treat failure to verify as an infraction. It also calls for decriminalizing homelessness by allowing people without an address to contact Public Safety to confirm their location.","Answer","https://schema.org",{"og:url":78,"og:type":113,"og:title":59,"og:site_name":91,"og:description":61},"article",{"robots":115,"canonical":78},"index,follow",{"doc_id":117,"site_id":56},278748,1790202979,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":120},{"doc_id":117,"user_id":121,"nickname":88,"user_avatar":122,"doc_module":9,"category_id":40,"category_name":41,"doc_title":59,"doc_description":61,"doc_content":123,"file_id":124,"file_url":125,"file_type":126,"file_size":127,"view_count":101,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":9,"is_downloadable":9,"audit_status":9,"page_count":73,"language":128,"language_code":57,"site_id":56,"html_lang":57,"table_of_contents":129,"faqs":130,"seo_title":131,"seo_description":61,"update_tm":132,"read_time":9},2336478940917,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","HB 6633  \nBill for Just Enforcement of Address Verifications  \n[OneStandardOfJustice.org](OneStandardOfJustice.org)  \nFor updates scan the link above or visit: [OneStandardOfJustice.org/Legislation](OneStandardOfJustice.org/Legislation)  \n[What are Address Verifications?](What are Address Verifications?)  \nIndividuals on Connecticut’s sex offense registry are required by state law to confirm their address by returning a letter mailed by the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection (DESPP) every three months. The signed letter must be received by DESPP within 10 days.  \nThe statutes governing the verifications include Sec. 54-251, 54-252, 54-253 and 54-254  \nHow are verifications enforced?  \nIf the address verification letter is not returned within 10 days of its postmark, the individual is determined to be‘non-compliant,’ and notice is provided to the local police. In Connecticut, ‘failure to verify’ is a strict liability Class‘D’ felony, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and/or the extension of the term of probation.  \nDoes the Law Work?  \nNO. It results in convictions of individuals who are living in a registered address but whose paperwork is simply lost or late. Addresses are verified every 90 days, so an arbitrary 10-day return requirement serves no purpose. There is no evidence that a late verification letter is predictive of repeat sexual offenses or recidivism.1  \nEnforcement is inconsistent, solely determined by the local police department. Some who are non-compliant are never arrested, others are arrested years after they became non-compliant. 44% of the 200 convicted each year face no sentence, another 43% receive suspended sentences, but the new felony2 still causes harm. Many more are dismissed but the arrest still results in lost employment, legal costs and court time.  \nDoes the Law Cause Harm?  \nYES. Being strict liability with no consideration of intent, late/lost mail, personal or family illness, or other extenuating circumstances can result in prison time for people who would otherwise be productive citizens. Felony convictions result in lost employment and a reversal of years of fragile gains through rehabilitation. This hurts families and incurs significant cost to the State, clogging the courts with nearly 200 cases2 each year for non-criminal behavior, and impacts Black citizens disproportionally.  \nThe homeless are particularly vulnerable. Without an address, they have no way to comply with the law3 and can only slip further into marginalization.  \nHow Should it Change?  \n- Allow judicial discretion to classify failure to verify address as an infraction.  \n- Decriminalize homelessness, by allowing those without an address to call-in to Public Safety to confirm their location.  \nOne Standard of Justice Cindy Prizio 203-722-0833 ver. 02/08/25  \n[CindyPrizio@OneStandardOfJustice.org](CindyPrizio@OneStandardOfJustice.org)  \nEven a small chance of late mail becomes a likelyhood over time  \n4  \nNationwide, 3% of mail is delived after more than 7 days late.  \nFor life-time registrants, arrest for a Class-D felony is a near  \nstatistical certainty  \nDid you know…  \nCompared to our neighbor states, Connecticut is the only one that doesn’t offer an affirmative defense  \nDisproportionate Outcomes  \nA review shows convictions impact Black communities more than others  \nThe impact  \n“In December 22, 2022, I came home from work to see three squad cars in my front yard. When I asked them what they needed they told me they had a warrant to arrest me for a late letter due to late mail during COVID— four years earlier!”-SDM  \nH. L. is a disabled senior in a senior home with a conservator. He was hand cuffed and taken toa Hartford holding cell without his medications; he went into seizures and was rushed to the hospital.  \nE.V. is a senior who was offense free for 35 years and was living in the same home for 15 years, when late mail led to his arrest. On a Friday evening he was handcuffed and had to bond ","cbCaihRcgV665G27","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihRcgV665G27","pdf",1720792,"English","# Address verification requirements\n## Enforcement process and strict liability\n# Effects and harm\n## Inconsistent enforcement\n## Disproportionate outcomes\n# Proposed changes","[{\"question\":\"What changes does the bill advocate?\",\"answer\":\"It proposes allowing judicial discretion to treat failure to verify as an infraction. It also calls for decriminalizing homelessness by allowing people without an address to contact Public Safety to confirm their location.\"}]","HB 6633 - Bill for Just Enforcement of Address Verifications | PDF",1789512195]