Vt. Stat. Ann. » Title 13 Chapter 221
Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 7041 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VT-LEGlegislature.vermont.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subchapter 002 : SENTENCE AND COMMITMENT

(Cite as: 13 V.S.A. § 7041)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2024 · leading case: State v. Thompson, 807 A.2d 454 (Vt. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Thompson, 807 A.2d 454 (Vt. 2002). · cites it 3× “This consolidated appeal asks the Court to decide whether a defendant convicted of a sex offense is required to register as a sex offender pursuant to Vermont’s Sex Offender Registration Act, when sentencing has been deferred pursuant to 13 V.S.A. § 7041. We hold that such…”
State v. Murray, 617 A.2d 135 (Vt. 1992). · cites it 4× “13 V.S.A. § 7041. There is no description in the statute of the nature of the probation imposed.”
State v. Thomas Gauthier, 2016 VT 37 (Vt. 2016). · cites it 2× “See 13 V.S.A. § 7041(a) (authorizing court to defer sentencing and place defendant on probation under conditions).”
State v. Rafuse, 726 A.2d 18 (Vt. 1998). · cites it 4× “§ 304 conflict with 13 VS.A. § 7041 and are not applicable. Defendant misconstrues the language in Murray , which states: “[although the regulatory provisions in Title 28 are normally used for post-sentence probation .”
State v. Lucas, 129 A.3d 646 (Vt. 2015). · cites it 2× “In August 2013, pursuant to a deferred-sentencing agreement, 13 V.S.A. § 7041, defendant pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of disseminating indecent material to a minor, id.”
State v. Hance, 596 A.2d 365 (Vt. 1991). · cites it 2× “In Buck , defendant was found guilty by a jury but entered into a sentencing agreement for a deferred sentence pursuant to 13 V.S.A. § 7041(a). The agreement restricted the issues defendant could raise on appeal.”
In re Unnamed, 2011 VT 25 (Vt. 2011). · cites it 2× “” In particular, the court must “issue an order to expunge all records and files related to the arrest, citation, investigation, charge, adjudication of guilt, criminal proceedings, and probation related to the deferred sentence.”
State v. Pierce, 657 A.2d 192 (Vt. 1995). · cites it 2× “The principal issue before us is whether 13 V.S.A. § 7041 violates the separation-of-powers doctrine by conditioning the trial court’s deferral of a criminal sentence upon the concurrence of the state’s attorney.”
State v. Cornell, 2014 VT 82 (Vt. 2014). · cites it 2× “See 13 V.S.A. § 7041(d) (providing that entry of deferment of sentence constitutes a final judgment for purposes of appeal); 28 V.”
State v. Yates, 726 A.2d 483 (Vt. 1999). “” See 13 V.S.A. § 7041(b). Upon fulfillment of such terms, the adjudication of guilty is stricken, and the defendant is discharged without ever having been sentenced.”
State v. Robar, 601 A.2d 1376 (Vt. 1991). “Defendant raises three arguments on appeal: (1) Atkins’ inquest testimony was not properly admitted into evidence, and thus may not support defendant’s conviction; (2) even if Atkins’ testimony was properly admitted, it was insufficient to sustain a conviction; and (3) the…”
Norman v. Vermont Off. of Court Adm'r, 2004 VT 13 (Vt. 2004). “See 13 V.S.A. § 7041(b) (upon completion of terms of probation and deferred sentence agreement, record of criminal proceedings shall be expunged “pursuant to section 5538 of Title 33”); 33 V.”
Show all 25 citing cases →
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 7041(a) — 8 cases
State v. Thomas Gauthier, 2016 VT 37 (Vt. 2016). “See 13 V.S.A. § 7041(a) (authorizing court to defer sentencing and place defendant on probation under conditions).”
State v. Hance, 596 A.2d 365 (Vt. 1991). “In Buck , defendant was found guilty by a jury but entered into a sentencing agreement for a deferred sentence pursuant to 13 V.S.A. § 7041(a). The agreement restricted the issues defendant could raise on appeal.”
State v. Murray, 617 A.2d 135 (Vt. 1992). “13 V.S.A. § 7041. There is no description in the statute of the nature of the probation imposed.”
State v. Rafuse, 726 A.2d 18 (Vt. 1998). “§ 304 conflict with 13 VS.A. § 7041 and are not applicable. Defendant misconstrues the language in Murray , which states: “[although the regulatory provisions in Title 28 are normally used for post-sentence probation .”
State v. Buck, 428 A.2d 1090 (Vt. 1981).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 7041(b) — 8 cases
State v. Rafuse, 726 A.2d 18 (Vt. 1998). “§ 304 conflict with 13 VS.A. § 7041 and are not applicable. Defendant misconstrues the language in Murray , which states: “[although the regulatory provisions in Title 28 are normally used for post-sentence probation .”
State v. Yates, 726 A.2d 483 (Vt. 1999). “” See 13 V.S.A. § 7041(b). Upon fulfillment of such terms, the adjudication of guilty is stricken, and the defendant is discharged without ever having been sentenced.”
Norman v. Vermont Off. of Court Adm'r, 2004 VT 13 (Vt. 2004). “See 13 V.S.A. § 7041(b) (upon completion of terms of probation and deferred sentence agreement, record of criminal proceedings shall be expunged “pursuant to section 5538 of Title 33”); 33 V.”
State v. Pierce, 657 A.2d 192 (Vt. 1995). “The principal issue before us is whether 13 V.S.A. § 7041 violates the separation-of-powers doctrine by conditioning the trial court’s deferral of a criminal sentence upon the concurrence of the state’s attorney.”
State v. Barrette, 571 A.2d 1137 (Vt. 1990).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 7041(d) — 3 cases
State v. Cornell, 2014 VT 82 (Vt. 2014). “See 13 V.S.A. § 7041(d) (providing that entry of deferment of sentence constitutes a final judgment for purposes of appeal); 28 V.”
State v. Lucas, 129 A.3d 646 (Vt. 2015). “In August 2013, pursuant to a deferred-sentencing agreement, 13 V.S.A. § 7041, defendant pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of disseminating indecent material to a minor, id.”
State v. Bryan Love, 172 A.3d 777 (Vt. 2017).
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 13, § 7041(e) — 5 cases
In re Unnamed, 2011 VT 25 (Vt. 2011). “” In particular, the court must “issue an order to expunge all records and files related to the arrest, citation, investigation, charge, adjudication of guilt, criminal proceedings, and probation related to the deferred sentence.”
State v. F.M., 2011 VT 100 (Vt. 2011).
State v. Bryan Love, 172 A.3d 777 (Vt. 2017).
State v. FM, 2011 VT 100 (Vt. 2011).
Desautels v. Bd. of Appeal on Motor Veh. Liab. Policies & Bonds (Mass. App. Ct. 2024).
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.