State v. Handson

With this decision we resolve the third case in a recent trilogy of appeals by the Office of the Defender General, all seeking relief from trial court orders to pay for certain services. See State v. Batchelder, 165 Vt. 326, 683 A.2d 1002 (1996); State v. Lizotte, No. 96-154 (Vt. July 26, 1996) (unpublished mem.). We address an issue left open by State v. Wool, 162 Vt. 342, 648 A.2d 655 (1994): given that indigent defendants who choose to represent themselves are entitled under the Public Defender Act, 13 V.S.A. § 5231(2),1 “to *88public funding for . . . necessary expenses” related to their…