The supervising officer of each facility shall be responsible for the discipline,
control, and safe custody of the inmates therein. No inmate shall be punished except
under the order of the officer or of a deputy designated by him or her for the purpose,
nor shall any punishment be imposed otherwise than in accordance with the provisions
of this subchapter. (Added 1971, No. 199 (Adj. Sess.), § 20.)
Zachary Rose v. Michael Touchette, Comm'r, Dep't of Corr., 2021 VT 77 (Vt. 2021). · cites it 5דHe argues that his program termination constituted punishment under 28 V.S.A. § 851 and therefore required a hearing and due process under § 852.”
Conway v. Cumming, 636 A.2d 735 (Vt. 1993). · cites it 2ד§ 1983 for violation under color of state law of federally protected civil rights, including rights guaranteed under the Eighth Amendment (guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment) and Fourteenth Amendment (due process of law); for violation of Chapter I, Article 4 of the…”
Borden v. Hofmann, 2009 VT 30 (Vt. 2009). · cites it 2דThis case requires us to determine whether placing an inmate on a Nutraloaf-and-water diet in response to misconduct constitutes "punishment" within the meaning of 28 V.S.A. § 851, thereby requiring a hearing prior to implementation of the diet *1250 under § 852.”
McLaughlin v. Baker (Vt. Super. Ct. 2024). “McLaughlin argues that the relevant statutes, 28 V.S.A. §§ 851–853, clearly require a hearing prior to the imposition of any punishment whatsoever, without distinguishing among the types of violations or severity of punishment.”
Ferraro v. Baker (Vt. Super. Ct. 2021). “Analysis The disciplinary process is governed by 28 V.S.A. § 851. It is supplemented by DOC Directive 410.”
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.