Vermont Statutes Annotated

Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 28, § 701 (2026)

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

Subchapter 001 : COMMITMENT, TRANSFER, AND DISCHARGE

(Cite as: 28 V.S.A. § 701)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: Nichols, Wool v. Hofmann, 2010 VT 36 (Vt. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nichols, Wool v. Hofmann, 2010 VT 36 (Vt. 2010). “2d at 633-34 (concluding that state contract with county in New Jersey to transfer inmates was entered into pursuant to DOC Commissioner’s broad authorization “to designate the place of confinement where the sentence shall be served” under 28 V.S.A. § 701(b) and not pursuant to…”
State v. Martin, 2008 VT 53 (Vt. 2008). “: (1) every person convicted in a court in this state of a designated crime on or after the effective date of this subchapter; and (2) every person who was convicted in a court in this state of a designated crime prior to the effective date of this subchapter and, after the…”
King v. Hofmann, 2008 VT 18 (Vt. 2008). “Finally, plaintiffs appear to argue that 28 V.S.A. § 701(c), which provides that any reference to sentencing or confinement of inmates to any correctional facility under the Department’s authority shall be construed to mean sentencing or confinement to the custody of the…”
Daye v. State, 769 A.2d 630 (2000). “” 28 V.S.A. § 701(b). To this end, the Commissioner may also “order the assignment and transfer of persons committed to the custody of the commissioner.”
williams v. menard (Vt. Super. Ct. 2024). “§ 601(10) (before May 25, 2016), but includes 5 exceptions at 28 V.S.A. § 701(b). Exception 1 applies if inspection is required by state or federal law.”
Brandt v. Pallito (Vt. Super. Ct. 2017). “” 28 V.S.A. § 701(b). 2 ORDER For the foregoing reasons, Mr.”
Williams v. Menard (Vt. Super. Ct. 2018). “§ 601(10) (before May 25, 2016), but includes 5 exceptions at 28 V.S.A. § 701(b). Exception 1 applies if inspection is required by state or federal law.”
Breer v. Deml (Vt. Super. Ct. 2026). “” 28 V.S.A. § 701(a), (b). The Legislature has further required the Department to “establish an offender reintegration process that requires offenders to be held accountable to their victims and the community,” under which an “offender who participates in the reintegration…”
State v. Martin (Vt. 2008). “: (1) every person convicted in a court in this state of a designated crime on or after the effective date of this subchapter; and (2) every person who was convicted in a court in this state of a designated crime prior to the effective date of this subchapter and, after the…”
Rebideau v. Moeykens, 312 A.2d 926 (Vt. 1973). · cites it 2× “See 28 V.S.A. § 701(a), (c), No. 199, § 20, of the Public Acts of 1971 (Adj.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 28, § 701(a) — 2 cases
Breer v. Deml (Vt. Super. Ct. 2026). “” 28 V.S.A. § 701(a), (b). The Legislature has further required the Department to “establish an offender reintegration process that requires offenders to be held accountable to their victims and the community,” under which an “offender who participates in the reintegration…”
Rebideau v. Moeykens, 312 A.2d 926 (Vt. 1973). “See 28 V.S.A. § 701(a), (c), No. 199, § 20, of the Public Acts of 1971 (Adj.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 28, § 701(b) — 6 cases
Nichols, Wool v. Hofmann, 2010 VT 36 (Vt. 2010). “2d at 633-34 (concluding that state contract with county in New Jersey to transfer inmates was entered into pursuant to DOC Commissioner’s broad authorization “to designate the place of confinement where the sentence shall be served” under 28 V.S.A. § 701(b) and not pursuant to…”
Daye v. State, 769 A.2d 630 (2000). “” 28 V.S.A. § 701(b). To this end, the Commissioner may also “order the assignment and transfer of persons committed to the custody of the commissioner.”
williams v. menard (Vt. Super. Ct. 2024). “§ 601(10) (before May 25, 2016), but includes 5 exceptions at 28 V.S.A. § 701(b). Exception 1 applies if inspection is required by state or federal law.”
Brandt v. Pallito (Vt. Super. Ct. 2017). “” 28 V.S.A. § 701(b). 2 ORDER For the foregoing reasons, Mr.”
Williams v. Menard (Vt. Super. Ct. 2018). “§ 601(10) (before May 25, 2016), but includes 5 exceptions at 28 V.S.A. § 701(b). Exception 1 applies if inspection is required by state or federal law.”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 28, § 701(c) — 1 case
King v. Hofmann, 2008 VT 18 (Vt. 2008). “Finally, plaintiffs appear to argue that 28 V.S.A. § 701(c), which provides that any reference to sentencing or confinement of inmates to any correctional facility under the Department’s authority shall be construed to mean sentencing or confinement to the custody of the…”
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.