Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 2 (2026)

Crimes committed partly outside State

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VT-LEGlegislature.vermont.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(Cite as: 13 V.S.A. § 2)

§ 2. Crimes committed partly outside State

A person who, with intent to commit a crime, does an act within this State in execution or part execution of such intent, which culminates in the commission of a crime either within or without this State, shall be punished for such crime in this State in the same manner as if the same had been committed entirely within this State. A crime committed by means of an electronic communication, including a telephonic communication, shall be considered to have been committed at either the place where the communication originated or the place where it was received. (Amended 1999, No. 124 (Adj. Sess.), § 1.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1969–2002 · leading case: Am. Booksellers Found. for Free Expression v. Dean, 202 F. Supp. 2d 300 (D. Vt. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Am. Booksellers Found. for Free Expression v. Dean, 202 F. Supp. 2d 300 (D. Vt. 2002). · cites it 6× “124 amended 13 V.S.A. § 2, Vermont’s criminal law jurisdictional provision, to read: § 2 CRIMES COMMITTED PARTLY OUTSIDE STATE A person who, with intent to commit a crime, does an act within this state in execution or part execution of such intent, which culminates in the…”

State v. Harrington, 260 A.2d 692 (Vt. 1969). · cites it 2× “Our statutory law of crimes and criminal procedure subjects to punishment — “a person who, with intent to commit a crime, does an act within this state in execution or part execution of such intent, which culminates in the commission of a crime either within or without this…”

State v. Mosher, 465 A.2d 261 (Vt. 1983). “” 13 V.S.A. § 2 gives the courts of this state jurisdiction whenever “[a] person who, with intent to commit a crime, does an act within this state in execution or part execution of such intent, which culminates in the commission of a crime either within or without this state .”

State v. Doyen, 676 A.2d 345 (Vt. 1996). “Defendant argues, however, that Vermont law, specifically 13 V.S.A. § 2 and related precedent of this Court, precludes Vermont from punishing his conduct.”

State v. Huginski, 422 A.2d 935 (Vt. 1980). “Based upon this evidence alone and even though the record reveals no conversations in Vermont which could be construed as procuring or counseling, the State claims that the trial court obtained jurisdiction by virtue of 13 V.S.A. § 2: Crimes committed partly outside state A…”

In re Ropp, 541 A.2d 84 (Vt. 1987). “The only defense offered by petitioner to extradition under § 4946 was that mere nonpayment was not a sufficient “act” to trigger extradition under that section. Such defense is without substance.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.