Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 28, § 254 (2026)

Attendance at treatment facility

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VT-LEGlegislature.vermont.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subchapter 002 : CONDITIONS OF PROBATION; MODIFICATIONS; DISCHARGE

(Cite as: 28 V.S.A. § 254)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1990–1990 · leading case: State v. Sanborn, 584 A.2d 1148 (Vt. 1990).
State v. Sanborn, 584 A.2d 1148 (Vt. 1990). “Nor do we decide the State’s contention that imposition of a payment requirement is specifically authorized , by 28 V.S.A. § 254(b). We also do not decide whether defendant can avoid revocation by attacking a requirement to which he specifically agreed.”
Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 28, § 254(b): 1 case
State v. Sanborn, 584 A.2d 1148 (Vt. 1990). “Nor do we decide the State’s contention that imposition of a payment requirement is specifically authorized , by 28 V.S.A. § 254(b). We also do not decide whether defendant can avoid revocation by attacking a requirement to which he specifically agreed.”
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.