Court Opinion

ID: 9644588
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 21:00:14.691618+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:15.683068
License: Public Domain

Morse, J.,
concurring. I concur, but do not reach the merits of the first two issues because, in my view, they were not preserved for our consideration. The Vermont constitutional claim was mentioned in the title of defendant’s memorandum of law in support of his motion to dismiss, but not argued in the trial court. Defendant did not argue reliance on the Eublic Defender Statute even though invited to do so by the trial court. I believe we should wait until those issues are preserved before deciding their merits. Otherwise, issues not deemed essential or important enough to pursue by the parties may be unilaterally injected for review by the trial court. Issues of plain error, not of first impression, should be raised by the court sua sponte.