State v. Hemingway, 196 Vt. 441 (2014)

Citation: State v. Hemingway, 196 Vt. 441 (2014)
Parent Document: State v. Hemingway, 196 Vt. 441 (2014)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2014-05-09
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2673207/state-v-hemingway/ ↗

Full Text

1,230 chars

¶ 43.        
The purpose of § 252(c) is to ensure that defendants have notice of
their probation conditions.  Without an express indication from the
Legislature that it intended the notice requirement of § 252(c) to act as
a strict bar against enforcement of probation conditions, defendants who know
their probation bars certain conduct should not be immunized from the consequences
of violating those conditions.  To allow defendant to escape
responsibility for violation of conditions known to him, but not received in a
formal certificate, elevates procedure over substance.  See State v.
White, 363 A.2d 143, 151 (Conn. 1975) (“Sentencing should not be a game in which a wrong
move by a judge means immunity for the prisoner.”).  Further, it is at
odds with the overall purpose of the probation statutes, which aim to
rehabilitate defendants while providing protection to the public.  Here,
invalidating the probation violation based on the court’s failure to provide
defendant a certificate harms foremost the victim of defendant’s crime. 
Such a result should not be reached lightly, especially where the language of
the statute does not particularly provide for this consequence.  I
respectfully dissent.

Other Sections in This Document (105)

Full Text