State v. Cate
In State v. Cate, 165 Vt. 404, 683 A.2d 1010 (1996), the defendant challenged a probation condition requiring him to sign an acknowledgment of responsibility for sexually assaulting the victim.
The Court held that a defendant cannot be forced to incriminate himself by admitting criminal responsibility as a condition of probation unless he first received immunity from any future criminal prosecution stemming from the admission. Cate, 165 Vt. at 415, 417, 683 A.2d at 1018, 1019.
The Court further held that if the prosecutor did not eliminate the risk of future prosecution derived from statements required for successful completion of rehabilitative probation, judicial use immunity would make such statements inadmissible against the probationer at any subsequent criminal trial. Id. at 417, 683 A.2d at 1019.