State v. Wargo

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that petitioner on probation was “in custody” because both factors of mandatory supervision and possibility of imminent incarceration were present
• “Mandatory supervision by judicial officers coupled with the possibility of imminent incarceration without a formal trial and criminal conviction are sufficient restrictions of a defendant’s liberty to constitute custody. . . . Both of these factors are present in this case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Yates
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 1999-01-08· cited 43×
• In Re Collette
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2008-12-12· cited 27×
• Dalmer v. State
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2002-08-15· cited 23×
• In re D.C., Juvenile
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2016-06-24· cited 16×
• In Re LaMountain
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2000-04-19· cited 10×
• State v. Thompson
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2011-08-31· cited 4×
• State v. Brooks
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2000-01-27· cited 3×