Vt. Stat. Ann. » Title 23 Chapter 13
Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1128 (2026)

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

Subchapter 011 : MISCELLANEOUS RULES

(Cite as: 23 V.S.A. § 1128)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1978–2025 · leading case: State v. Neisner, 2010 VT 112 (Vt. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Neisner, 2010 VT 112 (Vt. 2010). · cites it 4× “This, he complains, creates an impermissible ambiguity in the information rendering it invalid.”
State v. Keiser, 807 A.2d 378 (Vt. 2002). · cites it 4× “Defendant next advocates that this Court interpret 23 V.S.A. § 1128 to include a third knowledge requirement.”
State v. Myers, 2011 VT 43 (Vt. 2011). · cites it 4× “Based on this reasonableness requirement, defendant argues that the complaining witness here was brandishing what defendant believed was a gun and suggests that stopping immediately to provide information after hitting the complaining witness’s mailbox and mobile home could have…”
State v. Sidway, 431 A.2d 1237 (Vt. 1981). · cites it 2× “- 23 V.S.A. § 1128., The sentence of 0-6 months was suspended, she-, was fined $200, and granted probation.”
Morais v. Yee, 648 A.2d 405 (Vt. 1994). · cites it 2× “See 23 V.S.A. § 1128; see also 13 V.S.A. § 1 (defining felony).”
State v. Longe, 743 A.2d 569 (Vt. 1999). · cites it 2× “§ 1133, or for leaving the scene of an accident, see 23 V.S.A. § 1128 — those are covered in § 674(a).”
State v. Christopher P. Sullivan, 200 A.3d 670 (Vt. 2018). “§ 1201(a)(2) and § 1210(f)(1), which prescribes a maximum $10,000 fine and/or imprisonment for a minimum term of one year and a maximum of fifteen years.”
State v. Loso, 559 A.2d 681 (Vt. 1989). · cites it 3× “23 V.S.A. § 1128. On appeal defendant claims that the court erred in permitting the jury to know that he was employed as a police officer, allowing a number of amendments to the information during trial, and giving a copy of a portion of the LSA statute to the jury.”
State v. Coita, 568 A.2d 424 (Vt. 1989). · cites it 2× “23 V.S.A. §§ 1128, 1201(a)(2). These charges arose from an accident on Perkins Pier in Burlington, Vermont, on October 12, 1985, when the defendant ran into a parked vehicle and left the scene.”
State v. Forcier, 643 A.2d 1200 (Vt. 1994). · cites it 2× “(5) when the officer has probable cause to believe a person has committed or is committing a violation of 23 V.S.A. § 1128 [LSA] or 23 V.S.A. § 1201 [DWI].”
State v. Campbell, 497 A.2d 375 (Vt. 1985). · cites it 2× “§ 1091(a), and leaving the scene of an accident, 23 V.S.A. § 1128(a). Defendant claims the trial court erred (1) in admitting evidence concerning the identity of her vehicle, and (2) in denying her motion for acquittal on the grounds of insufficiency of the evidence.”
State v. Daley, 2006 VT 5 (Vt. 2006). “3 Under 23 V.S.A. § 1128(a), “[t]he operator of a motor vehicle who has caused or is involved in an accident resulting in injury to any person other than the operator, or in damage to any property other than the vehicle then under his or her control shall immediately stop and…”
Show all 24 citing cases →
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1128(a) — 14 cases
State v. Neisner, 2010 VT 112 (Vt. 2010). “This, he complains, creates an impermissible ambiguity in the information rendering it invalid.”
State v. Myers, 2011 VT 43 (Vt. 2011). “Based on this reasonableness requirement, defendant argues that the complaining witness here was brandishing what defendant believed was a gun and suggests that stopping immediately to provide information after hitting the complaining witness’s mailbox and mobile home could have…”
State v. Christopher P. Sullivan, 200 A.3d 670 (Vt. 2018). “§ 1201(a)(2) and § 1210(f)(1), which prescribes a maximum $10,000 fine and/or imprisonment for a minimum term of one year and a maximum of fifteen years.”
State v. Keiser, 807 A.2d 378 (Vt. 2002). “Defendant next advocates that this Court interpret 23 V.S.A. § 1128 to include a third knowledge requirement.”
State v. Campbell, 497 A.2d 375 (Vt. 1985). “§ 1091(a), and leaving the scene of an accident, 23 V.S.A. § 1128(a). Defendant claims the trial court erred (1) in admitting evidence concerning the identity of her vehicle, and (2) in denying her motion for acquittal on the grounds of insufficiency of the evidence.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1128(b) — 1 case
State v. Neisner, 2010 VT 112 (Vt. 2010). “This, he complains, creates an impermissible ambiguity in the information rendering it invalid.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1128(c) — 1 case
State v. Keiser, 807 A.2d 378 (Vt. 2002). “Defendant next advocates that this Court interpret 23 V.S.A. § 1128 to include a third knowledge requirement.”
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.