Title: State v. Handson

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

State v. Handson  (94-634); 166 Vt. 85; 689 A.2d 1081

[Filed 13-Dec-1996]

       NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under
  V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont
  Reports.  Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
  Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801 of
  any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes
  to press. 

                                 No. 94-634

State of Vermont                                  Supreme Court

                                                  On Appeal from
     v.                                           District Court of Vermont,
                                                  Unit No. 2, Chittenden Circuit

Carl Handson                                      June Term, 1996

Dean B. Pineles, J.

       Jeffrey L. Amestoy, Attorney General, Montpelier, and Donal F.
  Hartman, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Waterbury, for plaintiff-appellee

       Robert Appel, Defender General, Montpelier, for defendant-appellant

PRESENT:  Allen, C.J., Gibson, Dooley, Morse and Johnson, JJ.

       JOHNSON, J.   With this decision we resolve the third case in a recent
  trilogy of appeals by the Office of the Defender General, all seeking
  relief from trial court orders to pay for certain services.  See State v.
  Batchelder, 7 Vt. L.W. 172 (1996); State v. Lizotte, No. 96-154 (Vt. July
  26, 1996) (unpublished mem.).  We address an issue left open by State v.
  Wool, 162 Vt. 342,