Vt. Stat. Ann. » Title 23 Chapter 13

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210

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

Subchapter 013 : DRUNKEN DRIVING

(Cite as: 23 V.S.A. § 1210)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 47 cases, 1977–2020 · leading case: State v. Porter
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Porter (1996) vt · cites it 23× “[2] 23 V.S.A. § 1210(a) (1978) (current version at 23 V.”
In Re Collette (2008) vt · cites it 6× “We would expect that the typical fine imposed for a second DUI conviction would be higher than that imposed for a first DUI conviction.”
State v. Boskind (2002) vt · cites it 4× “For each defendant, the State sought the enhanced penalty for a DUI-third offense pursuant to 23 V.S.A. § 1210(d) ("A person convicted of violating section 1201 of this title who has twice been convicted of violation of that section shall be fined not more than $2,500.”
State v. LeBlanc (2000) vt · cites it 7× “This is an interlocutory appeal from a decision of the district court granting defendant Andre LeBlanc’s motion to dismiss the DUI, fifth offense charge against him, and amending the charge to DUI, second offense.”
State v. Wainwright (2013) vt · cites it 5× “1ty for that offense under 23 V.S.A. § 1210. The trial court held that the statute prohibited such dual use, and the State appeals.”
State v. Michael Rosenfield (2016) vt · cites it 5× “As the majority recognizes, DUI-3 is a separate offense as defined in 23 V.S.A. § 1210(d). To convict a defendant of DUI-3, the State must plead and prove the predicate convictions, and the jury must find each of them as a facts.”
State v. Brown (1996) vt · cites it 4× “23 V.S.A. § 1210(d). Defendants contest the use of their prior uncounseled DUI convictions to support the felony third-offense sentences on two grounds: (1) that enhancing third-offense sentences based on prior uncounseled convictions violates the right to counsel under the…”
In Re Miller (2009) vt · cites it 2× “When petitioner and his attorney sat down at the plea-bargaining table with the State, petitioner had been charged with: (1) one count of DUI-6, 23 V.S.A. § 1210(d), carrying a maximum penalty of five years and/or a fine of $2,500; (2) one count of DLS-2, 23 V.”
McCoy v. Commissioner of Public Safety (2011) conn · cites it 2× “13, § 1 [200]; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210 [2009]); Virginia (Va.”
State v. Lambert (1985) vt · cites it 3× “The sentence fell well within the parameters of 23 V.S.A. § 1210(a). However, assuming that the judge rejected defendant’s argument and considered the prior conviction, defendant nevertheless failed sufficiently to present a claim justifying reversal.”
State v. Perry (1989) vt · cites it 5× “Although the existence of provisions in the Colorado Liquor Code requiring that certain proscribed conduct be punished under the general criminal code may evince an intent on the part of that legislature that all other violations under their Liquor Code be punished as provided…”
In re Wight Manning (2016) vt · cites it 2× “However, because the appropriate relief for the inadequate Rule 11 colloquy in the DUI-3 case is an order directed at the DUI-4 sentence, which was subject to enhancement pursuant to 23 V.S.A. § 1210(e), we reverse and remand for the Superior Court to enter an order vacating the…”
Show all 47 citing cases →
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210(a) — 4 cases
State v. Porter (1996) vt “[2] 23 V.S.A. § 1210(a) (1978) (current version at 23 V.”
State v. Lambert (1985) vt “The sentence fell well within the parameters of 23 V.S.A. § 1210(a). However, assuming that the judge rejected defendant’s argument and considered the prior conviction, defendant nevertheless failed sufficiently to present a claim justifying reversal.”
State v. Quintin (1983) vt
State v. Greenslet (1985) vt
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210(b) — 11 cases
State v. Porter (1996) vt “[2] 23 V.S.A. § 1210(a) (1978) (current version at 23 V.”
In Re Collette (2008) vt “We would expect that the typical fine imposed for a second DUI conviction would be higher than that imposed for a first DUI conviction.”
State v. Wainwright (2013) vt “1ty for that offense under 23 V.S.A. § 1210. The trial court held that the statute prohibited such dual use, and the State appeals.”
State v. Welch (1977) vt
State v. DeRosa (1993) vt
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210(c) — 9 cases
State v. Porter (1996) vt “[2] 23 V.S.A. § 1210(a) (1978) (current version at 23 V.”
In Re Collette (2008) vt “We would expect that the typical fine imposed for a second DUI conviction would be higher than that imposed for a first DUI conviction.”
State v. Baril (1990) vt
In re Chandler (2013) vt
State v. Wainwright (2013) vt “1ty for that offense under 23 V.S.A. § 1210. The trial court held that the statute prohibited such dual use, and the State appeals.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210(c)(2)(B) — 1 case
State v. Baker (1990) vt
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210(d) — 14 cases
State v. Porter (1996) vt “[2] 23 V.S.A. § 1210(a) (1978) (current version at 23 V.”
State v. Boskind (2002) vt “For each defendant, the State sought the enhanced penalty for a DUI-third offense pursuant to 23 V.S.A. § 1210(d) ("A person convicted of violating section 1201 of this title who has twice been convicted of violation of that section shall be fined not more than $2,500.”
State v. LeBlanc (2000) vt “This is an interlocutory appeal from a decision of the district court granting defendant Andre LeBlanc’s motion to dismiss the DUI, fifth offense charge against him, and amending the charge to DUI, second offense.”
State v. Brown (1996) vt “23 V.S.A. § 1210(d). Defendants contest the use of their prior uncounseled DUI convictions to support the felony third-offense sentences on two grounds: (1) that enhancing third-offense sentences based on prior uncounseled convictions violates the right to counsel under the…”
In Re Miller (2009) vt “When petitioner and his attorney sat down at the plea-bargaining table with the State, petitioner had been charged with: (1) one count of DUI-6, 23 V.S.A. § 1210(d), carrying a maximum penalty of five years and/or a fine of $2,500; (2) one count of DLS-2, 23 V.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210(e) — 4 cases
In re Wight Manning (2016) vt “However, because the appropriate relief for the inadequate Rule 11 colloquy in the DUI-3 case is an order directed at the DUI-4 sentence, which was subject to enhancement pursuant to 23 V.S.A. § 1210(e), we reverse and remand for the Superior Court to enter an order vacating the…”
State v. Brunelle (1987) vt
State v. Perry (1989) vt “Although the existence of provisions in the Colorado Liquor Code requiring that certain proscribed conduct be punished under the general criminal code may evince an intent on the part of that legislature that all other violations under their Liquor Code be punished as provided…”
State v. Yudichak (1989) vt
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210(e)(1) — 1 case
State v. Michael Rosenfield (2016) vt “As the majority recognizes, DUI-3 is a separate offense as defined in 23 V.S.A. § 1210(d). To convict a defendant of DUI-3, the State must plead and prove the predicate convictions, and the jury must find each of them as a facts.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210(f) — 1 case
State v. Perry (1989) vt “Although the existence of provisions in the Colorado Liquor Code requiring that certain proscribed conduct be punished under the general criminal code may evince an intent on the part of that legislature that all other violations under their Liquor Code be punished as provided…”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 1210(f)(1) — 1 case
State v. Christopher Sullivan (2017) vt
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.