State v. Morse

Supreme Court of Vermont

State v. Morse

572 A.2d 1342, 153 Vt. 651, 1990 Vt. LEXIS 21

CourtSupreme Court of Vermont

DecidedJanuary 16, 1990

DocketNo. 89-006

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 572 A.2d 1342 (State v. Morse) 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. Morse, 572 A.2d 1342, 153 Vt. 651, 1990 Vt. LEXIS 21 (Vt. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendant appeals a speeding conviction, claiming that the ordinance imposing the relevant speed limit was not based on “an engineering and traffic investigation,” as required by 23 V.S.A. § 1007. In addition to offering his own testimony that he was unable to locate any traffic or engineering surveys for the area in question, defendant subpoenaed the South Burlington Assistant City Clerk, who testified that she was unable to produce the surveys. Such testimony constituted “competent evidence tending to show a lack of strict compliance with statutory procedures,” and, therefore, was sufficient to compel the State to come forward with additional evidence of validity of the ordinance. See State v. Page, 142 Vt. 522, 524-25, 457 A.2d 653, 654-55 (1983) (citing Town of Waterford v. Pike Industries, Inc., 135 Vt. 193, 196, 373 A.2d 528, 530 (1977)). Inasmuch as the evidence was not forthcoming, the State has failed to meet its burden of proof and the conviction must be reversed.

Reversed.

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

Defendant appeals a speeding conviction, claiming that the ordinance imposing the relevant speed limit was not based on “an engineering and traffic investigation,” as required by 23 V.S.A. § 1007. In addition to offering his own testimony that he was unable to locate any traffic or engineering surveys for the area in question, defendant subpoenaed the South Burlington Assistant City Clerk, who testified that she was unable to produce the surveys. Such testimony constituted “competent evidence tending to show a lack of strict compliance with statutory procedures,” and, therefore, was sufficient to compel the State to come forward with additional evidence of validity of the ordinance. See State v. Page, 142 Vt. 522, 524-25, 457 A.2d 653, 654-55 (1983) (citing Town of Waterford v. Pike Industries, Inc., 135 Vt. 193, 196, 373 A.2d 528, 530 (1977)). Inasmuch as the evidence was not forthcoming, the State has failed to meet its burden of proof and the conviction must be reversed.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

572 A.2d 1342, 153 Vt. 651, 1990 Vt. LEXIS 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-morse-vt-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack