Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Thompson

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided August 31, 2011No. 10-045Published

1Dissent

Reiber, C.J.,

¶ 15. dissenting. Simply stated, the court lacked jurisdiction over defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea. In July, there was no jurisdiction because defendant was in custody under sentence. In September, there was still no jurisdiction because the court’s July order striking the sentence was invalid and had no effect. Each of the majority’s attempts to identify a rationale for jurisdiction in the trial court at the time of its July order lacks a basis in the law. The parties could not confer jurisdiction on the court by agreement, much less by “acquiesee[nce].” Ante, ¶¶ 3 n.l,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. In re B.C.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1999
  2. Shute v. ShuteSupreme Court of Vermont · 1992
  3. In Re LaMountainSupreme Court of Vermont · 2000
  4. State v. KingSupreme Court of Vermont · 2007
  5. State v. CooleySupreme Court of Vermont · 1977

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

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

Powered by the Exa API