Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Vermont opinions name it 1 courts 1979–2012 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Vermont courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Frank Olmos Castenadagreen2 sentences1989As we have stated previously, ‘“[t]he duty to exclude objectionable data lies squarely upon the shoulders of defense counsel.’” State v. Kasper, 137 Vt. 184, 190 , 404 A.2d 85, 89 (1979) (quoting United States v. Castenada, 555 F.2d 605, 610 (7th Cir. 1977)). “‘If the rule were otherwise, counsel might at times be tempted to remain silent about some fault on the part of the trial court ... and so, without giving it a chance to correct the situation, arm themselves with ground for reversal if the verdict should go against them.’” Id. at 190-91, 404 A.2d at 89 (quoting State v. Hood, 123 Vt. 273 1989As we have stated previously, "`[t]he duty to exclude objectionable data lies squarely upon the shoulders of defense counsel.'" State v. Kasper, 137 Vt. 184, 190 , 404 A.2d 85, 89 (1979) (quoting United States v. Castenada, 555 F.2d 605, 610 (7th Cir.1977)). "`If the rule were otherwise, counsel might at times be tempted to remain silent about some fault on the part of the trial court ... and so, without giving it a chance to correct the situation, arm themselves with ground for reversal if the verdict should go against them'" Id. 137 Vt. at 190-91, 404 A.2d at 89 (quoting State v. Hood, 123 V | 4 | 4 |
State v. Kaspergreen2 sentences1989As we have stated previously, ‘“[t]he duty to exclude objectionable data lies squarely upon the shoulders of defense counsel.’” State v. Kasper, 137 Vt. 184, 190 , 404 A.2d 85, 89 (1979) (quoting United States v. Castenada, 555 F.2d 605, 610 (7th Cir. 1977)). “‘If the rule were otherwise, counsel might at times be tempted to remain silent about some fault on the part of the trial court ... and so, without giving it a chance to correct the situation, arm themselves with ground for reversal if the verdict should go against them.’” Id. at 190-91, 404 A.2d at 89 (quoting State v. Hood, 123 Vt. 273 1989As we have stated previously, ‘“[t]he duty to exclude objectionable data lies squarely upon the shoulders of defense counsel.’” State v. Kasper, 137 Vt. 184, 190 , 404 A.2d 85, 89 (1979) (quoting United States v. Castenada, 555 F.2d 605, 610 (7th Cir. 1977)). “‘If the rule were otherwise, counsel might at times be tempted to remain silent about some fault on the part of the trial court ... and so, without giving it a chance to correct the situation, arm themselves with ground for reversal if the verdict should go against them.’” Id. at 190-91, 404 A.2d at 89 (quoting State v. Hood, 123 Vt. 273 | 3 | 3 |
Downs v. Downsgreen1 sentence2012State v. Roberts, 154 Vt. 59, 74 , 574 A.2d 1248, 1255 (1990) (citing State v. Recor, 150 Vt. 40, 46 , 549 A.2d 1382, 1387 (1988), for its observation that “[t]he duty to exclude objectionable [testimony] lies squarely on the shoulders of defense counsel” (quotation omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Robertsgreen2 sentences2012State v. Roberts, 154 Vt. 59, 74 , 574 A.2d 1248, 1255 (1990) (citing State v. Recor, 150 Vt. 40, 46 , 549 A.2d 1382, 1387 (1988), for its observation that “[t]he duty to exclude objectionable [testimony] lies squarely on the shoulders of defense counsel” (quotation omitted)). 2012State v. Roberts, 154 Vt. 59, 74 , 574 A.2d 1248, 1255 (1990) (citing State v. Recor, 150 Vt. 40, 46 , 549 A.2d 1382, 1387 (1988), for its observation that “[t]he duty to exclude objectionable [testimony] lies squarely on the shoulders of defense counsel” (quotation omitted)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hoodgreen2 sentences1989As we have stated previously, ‘“[t]he duty to exclude objectionable data lies squarely upon the shoulders of defense counsel.’” State v. Kasper, 137 Vt. 184, 190 , 404 A.2d 85, 89 (1979) (quoting United States v. Castenada, 555 F.2d 605, 610 (7th Cir. 1977)). “‘If the rule were otherwise, counsel might at times be tempted to remain silent about some fault on the part of the trial court ... and so, without giving it a chance to correct the situation, arm themselves with ground for reversal if the verdict should go against them.’” Id. at 190-91, 404 A.2d at 89 (quoting State v. Hood, 123 Vt. 273 1989As we have stated previously, ‘“[t]he duty to exclude objectionable data lies squarely upon the shoulders of defense counsel.’” State v. Kasper, 137 Vt. 184, 190 , 404 A.2d 85, 89 (1979) (quoting United States v. Castenada, 555 F.2d 605, 610 (7th Cir. 1977)). “‘If the rule were otherwise, counsel might at times be tempted to remain silent about some fault on the part of the trial court ... and so, without giving it a chance to correct the situation, arm themselves with ground for reversal if the verdict should go against them.’” Id. at 190-91, 404 A.2d at 89 (quoting State v. Hood, 123 Vt. 273 | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Recor
green
1 sentence2012State v. Roberts, 154 Vt. 59, 74 , 574 A.2d 1248, 1255 (1990) (citing State v. Recor, 150 Vt. 40, 46 , 549 A.2d 1382, 1387 (1988), for its observation that “[t]he duty to exclude objectionable [testimony] lies squarely on the shoulders of defense counsel” (quotation omitted)). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.