Legal Opinion

State v. Putnam

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided September 10, 1979No. 243-78PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLarrow, J.

Defendant was convicted, after trial by court upon an agreed statement of facts, of violating 23 V.S.A. § 674 by operating a motor vehicle upon a public highway after his license or right to operate had been revoked, suspended or refused by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles. The fact of operation is not contested, defendant’s claim being that the suspensions in question were tainted with “illegality” and that he was entitled to raise this issue in his criminal prosecution. Without passing upon the claim of illegality, the trial court ruled that it could not be raised by collateral attack in…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  2. State v. CameronSupreme Court of Vermont · 1967
  3. Aiken v. MalloySupreme Court of Vermont · 1974
  4. State v. DeBerySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1954
  5. Town of Putney v. Town of BrooklineSupreme Court of Vermont · 1967

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. MottSupreme Court of Vermont · 1997
  2. Bennett Estate v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1981
  3. State v. CrownSupreme Court of Vermont · 1999
  4. Roberts v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1985
  5. In re CarpenterSupreme Court of Vermont · 2018

2 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