State v. Cardinal

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “punitive forfeiture of cash bail, originally imposed as a means of assuring defendant’s appearance at court, is not the appropriate method of enforcing other conditions of release”
• holding that bail condition of $250,000 was not supported by evidence where defendant, charged with sexual assault, was a lifelong resident of Vermont with wife, four children, and job working for same employer for seventeen years
• stating that the policy underlying our bail statutes that allow imposition of various conditions of release, including monetary ones, is reasonably assuring the appearance of the person at trial
• stating that the policy underlying our bail statutes that allow imposition of various conditions of release, including monetary ones, is reasonably assuring the appearance of the person at trial
• no authority to order forfeiture of cash bail for a breach of condition of release other than an appearance condition
• “purpose of forfeiture ... is ... to assure that the defendant will appear at court when required”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Duff
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 1989-04-21· cited 84×
• In Re Miller
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2009-04-03· cited 42×
• State v. James C. Lohr
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2020-06-05· cited 22×
• State v. Brown
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2005-08-26· cited 21×
• State v. Korecky
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 2001-08-06· cited 20×
• State v. Ashley
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 1993-10-08· cited 20×
• State v. Malik A. Pratt
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2017-03-06· cited 19×
• State v. Mottolese
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2015-06-12· cited 6×
• State v. Marsh
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2001-12-19· cited 5×
• State v. William Edward Bailey
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2017-03-10· cited 3×