State v. Angelucci

Supreme Court of Vermont

State v. Angelucci

399 A.2d 178, 136 Vt. 645, 1979 Vt. LEXIS 1190

CourtSupreme Court of Vermont

DecidedJanuary 18, 1979

DocketNo. 7-78

StatusPublished

This text of 399 A.2d 178 (State v. Angelucci) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Angelucci, 399 A.2d 178, 136 Vt. 645, 1979 Vt. LEXIS 1190 (Vt. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

January 18, 1979. In the above cause, the motion of the defendant for release on bail pending appeal under V.R.A.P. 9(b) was heard by the undersigned Associate Justice. The defendant was represented by William A. Nelson, Esq., Appellate Defender. The State was represented by Gregory W. McNaughton, Esq., State’s Attorney, Washington County.

The defendant is presently in execution of a ten to thirty year sentence imposed after he was convicted of the crimes of burglary, larceny, and being a habitual offender. Upon consideration of the affidavits filed with the motion, the oral arguments of counsel, the defendant’s serious felony record, and his sentence, I do not find justification sufficient for the exercise of judicial discretion in favor of a release pending appeal. Motion denied.

Daley, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

January 18, 1979. In the above cause, the motion of the defendant for release on bail pending appeal under V.R.A.P. 9(b) was heard by the undersigned Associate Justice. The defendant was represented by William A. Nelson, Esq., Appellate Defender. The State was represented by Gregory W. McNaughton, Esq., State’s Attorney, Washington County.

The defendant is presently in execution of a ten to thirty year sentence imposed after he was convicted of the crimes of burglary, larceny, and being a habitual offender. Upon consideration of the affidavits filed with the motion, the oral arguments of counsel, the defendant’s serious felony record, and his sentence, I do not find justification sufficient for the exercise of judicial discretion in favor of a release pending appeal. Motion denied.

Daley, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

399 A.2d 178, 136 Vt. 645, 1979 Vt. LEXIS 1190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-angelucci-vt-1979.