Legal Opinion

State v. Bacon

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided August 29, 1997No. 96-548PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

We consider for the second time the circumstances under which a presentence investigation report (PSI) should be disclosed to persons other than the defendant, defense counsel, and the attorney for the state. See V.R.Cr.P 32(c)(3). In State v. LaBounty, 167 Vt. 25, 702 A.2d 82 (1997), we held that PSIs are not subject to a qualified First Amendment right of access, and should not be routinely disclosed to the press and public. Id. at 27, 702 A.2d at 83. We left open the question posed in this case: whether, and upon what showing, a third party should be granted access to a PSI. The district…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Pennsylvania v. RitchieSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Pulley v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Rodriguez De Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. KeiserSupreme Court of Vermont · 2002
  2. State v. WhiteSupreme Court of Vermont · 2001
  3. Germain v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
  4. In re StevensSupreme Court of Vermont · 2014
  5. State of Vermont v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.Vermont Superior Court · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API