State v. O'NEILL
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtMorse, J.
These consolidated interlocutory appeals arise from the Washington District Court’s denial of defendants’ motions to dismiss charges of obstruction of justice under 13 V.S.A. § 3015 (“[w]hoever . . . corruptly. . . obstructs or impedes, or endeavors to obstruct or impede the due administration of justice” commits a crime). Defendants, relying on the interpretation of a federal statute similar to Vermont’s, claim that the existence of a pending judicial proceeding is an element of the crime. The trial court ruled that a pending judicial proceeding is not a required element under Vermont’s…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Pettibone v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Winey v. William E. Dailey, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1993
- Swett v. Haig's, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1995
- United States v. ScoratowDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1956
- United States v. Billy Franklin Brand and Dennis Randall WattsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by69 opinions
- In Re HandySupreme Court of Vermont · 2000
- Town of Hinesburg v. DunklingSupreme Court of Vermont · 1998
- Town of Killington v. StateSupreme Court of Vermont · 2001
- Elkins v. Microsoft Corp.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2002
- State v. LussierSupreme Court of Vermont · 2000
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.