Kirk WOOL v. Andrew PALLITO, Commissioner Bernard Carter v. Lisa Menard, Commissioner
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtSkoglund, J.
¶ 1. Plaintiffs are inmates in the custody of the Department of Corrections who claim that a statute and certain administrative policies enacted after their incarceration operate together to retroactively increase the length of their sentences, in violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution. We conclude that plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate an ex post facto violation and therefore affirm the trial court's award of summary judgment to the Department in each case.
I. Wool v. Pallito , No. 2017-131
¶ 2. Kirk Wool was convicted by jury in 1992 of two counts of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Collins v. YoungbloodSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- California Department of Corrections v. MoralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Garner v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- In re S.B.L.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1988
- In re CarterSupreme Court of Vermont · 2004
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In re James BurkeSupreme Court of Vermont · 2019
- State v. Ernest PhillipsSupreme Court of Vermont · 2018
- Wool v. BakerDistrict Court, D. Vermont · 2020