Skip to main content

State v. Rolfe

Citations

  • 686 A.2d 949
  • 166 Vt. 1
  • 1996 Vt. LEXIS 102
  • 1996 WL 629946

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that defendant may contest foundational facts but not otherwise challenge admissibility of test results
  • interpreting term “valid” in § 1203(d) to establish threshold of admissibility of test into evidence
  • interpreting virtually identical statutory language “as determining the validity of any analysis of a blood or breath sample by any means”
  • the Court “defer[s] to an agency’s interpretation of enabling legislation unless there is a compelling indication of error”
  • defendant free to offer evidence to contest foundational facts or to urge jury to give test results no weight
  • in construing a statute, we look first to the “plain, ordinary meaning” of its language

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Allen, Gibson, Dooley, Morse, Johnson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.