Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Felix

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided August 1, 2014No. 2012-248Published

1Dissent

*246Reiber, C.J.,

¶ 34. dissenting. In this case, the jury convicted defendant based on evidence that included testimony from a confidential informant who was terminated for unrelated reasons after participating in the controlled buy in this case. The majority concludes the trial court erred in limiting certain evidence surrounding the informant’s termination. But the jury had ample evidence with which to weigh the informant’s credibility and was not misled by the State. Defendant here asks this Court to second-guess the jury’s credibility determination. This we should not do. Therefore, I…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Delaware v. FenstererSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. In Re Verizon Wireless Barton PermitSupreme Court of Vermont · 2010
  3. John A. Russell Corp. v. BohligSupreme Court of Vermont · 1999
  4. State v. BrochuSupreme Court of Vermont · 2008
  5. State v. LaroseSupreme Court of Vermont · 1988

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