15 Vermont opinions name it 1 courts 1995–2026 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Vermont courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Passinogreen2 sentences2026See State v. Passino, 154 Vt. 377, 383, 577 A.2d 281, 285 (1990) (“We emphasize that the bail hearing must be scheduled as soon as reasonably possible to protect defendant’s right to bail.”). ¶ 21. 2026See State v. Passino, 154 Vt. 377, 383, 577 A.2d 281, 285 (1990) (“We emphasize that the bail hearing must be scheduled as soon as reasonably possible to protect defendant’s right to bail.”). ¶ 21. | 4 | 4 |
State v. Turnbaughgreen2 sentences2020See Turnbaugh, 174 Vt. at 534 , 811 A.2d at 665 (noting that asking court to make credibility determinations at this stage “would treat a bail hearing as if it were an adjudication of the merits of the case, which it is not”). 2020See Turnbaugh, 174 Vt. at 534 , 811 A.2d at 665 (noting that asking court to make credibility determinations at this stage “would treat a bail hearing as if it were an adjudication of the merits of the case, which it is not”). | 3 | 3 |
State v. James C. Lohrgreen2 sentences2024“If the trial is not commenced within 60 days and the delay is not attributable to the defense, the court shall immediately schedule a bail hearing and shall set bail for the person.” 13 V.S.A. § 7553b(b) (emphasis added); see also State v. Lohr, 2020 VT 41, ¶ 16 , 212 Vt. 289 (“If the requirements of § 7553b are satisfied, the court must hold a hearing and engage in an analysis under 13 V.S.A. § 7554”); State v. Perron, No. 24-AP-163, 2024 WL 3416096 , at *1 n. 1 (Vt. 2020Lohr, 2020 VT 41, ¶ 16 . | 1 | 2 |
United States v. Caraballogreen1 sentence2023Cf. Caraballo, 963 F. Supp. 2d at 364 (“Courts, including the Supreme Court, have recognized that the need to obtain and preserve critical evidence in the investigation of a serious crime constitutes ‘exigent circumstances’ which renders the failure to obtain a warrant reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.” (citing cases)). 4 Defendant correctly notes that while a witness testified at the bail hearing that he saw defendant with a silver-black gun, police did not possess that information at the time of the ping request. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Selivonikgreen2 sentences2016By the same token, father asserts that because a substantiation of abuse does not satisfy the clear-and-convincing-evidence standard required in a termination hearing, see In re Selivonik, 164 Vt. 383, 388 , 670 A.2d 831, 835 (1995) (stating that “agencies investigating reports of suspected child abuse need not apply a preponderance of evidence standard to their determinations”), it is not competent evidence in a termination hearing. 2016By the same token, father asserts that because a substantiation of abuse does not satisfy the clear-and-convincing-evidence standard required in a termination hearing, see In re Selivonik, 164 Vt. 383, 388 , 670 A.2d 831, 835 (1995) (stating that “agencies investigating reports of suspected child abuse need not apply a preponderance of evidence standard to their determinations”), it is not competent evidence in a termination hearing. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Falzogreen1 sentence2014Falzo, 2009 VT 22, ¶ 8 (‘Whatever confusion counsel may have labored under should not work to defendant’s disadvantage.”). ¶ 3. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Blackmergreen2 sentences2007Under such circumstances, a presumption arises in favor of incarceration, and “release is reserved only for extraordinary cases.” State v. Blackmer, 160 Vt. 451, 458 , 631 A.2d 1134, 1139 (1993). 2007Under such circumstances, a presumption arises in favor of incarceration, and “release is reserved only for extraordinary cases.” State v. Blackmer, 160 Vt. 451, 458 , 631 A.2d 1134, 1139 (1993). | 1 | 1 |
Bates v. Ogatagreen1 sentence2002However, this should not be taken to mean that information must be accepted by the court without regal’d to its reliability.”); Snow v. Commonwealth, 537 N.E.2d 578, 579 (Mass. 1989) (“Hearsay statements may be used by a judge in reaching a decision concerning the amount of bail.”); State v. Poulicakos, 559 A.2d 1341, 1342-43 (N.H. 1989) (state may proceed by proffer of evidence); Bates v. Ogata, 482 P.2d 153, 155 (Haw. 1971) (in nonjury hearing of limited scope, like bail hearing, “question as to whether any particular evidence may be considered, and whether it is sufficient, must ultimately | 1 | 1 |
Snow v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2002However, this should not be taken to mean that information must be accepted by the court without regal’d to its reliability.”); Snow v. Commonwealth, 537 N.E.2d 578, 579 (Mass. 1989) (“Hearsay statements may be used by a judge in reaching a decision concerning the amount of bail.”); State v. Poulicakos, 559 A.2d 1341, 1342-43 (N.H. 1989) (state may proceed by proffer of evidence); Bates v. Ogata, 482 P.2d 153, 155 (Haw. 1971) (in nonjury hearing of limited scope, like bail hearing, “question as to whether any particular evidence may be considered, and whether it is sufficient, must ultimately | 1 | 1 |
State v. Poulicakosgreen1 sentence2002However, this should not be taken to mean that information must be accepted by the court without regal’d to its reliability.”); Snow v. Commonwealth, 537 N.E.2d 578, 579 (Mass. 1989) (“Hearsay statements may be used by a judge in reaching a decision concerning the amount of bail.”); State v. Poulicakos, 559 A.2d 1341, 1342-43 (N.H. 1989) (state may proceed by proffer of evidence); Bates v. Ogata, 482 P.2d 153, 155 (Haw. 1971) (in nonjury hearing of limited scope, like bail hearing, “question as to whether any particular evidence may be considered, and whether it is sufficient, must ultimately | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Vermont. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Madison
green
2 sentences2020The voters of Vermont voted “to permit pretrial detention, in appropriate circumstances, of those accused of violent crimes so as to prevent further harm to the victims of the crimes and to others.” Madison, 163 Vt. at 363 , 658 A.2d at 539 . 2020The voters of Vermont voted “to permit pretrial detention, in appropriate circumstances, of those accused of violent crimes so as to prevent further harm to the victims of the crimes and to others.” Madison, 163 Vt. at 363 , 658 A.2d at 539 . | 2 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Aaron Lontine
green
1 sentence2020Both the trial court and Justice Robinson concluded, under Lontine, that the sixty-day period begins when the trial court makes all of the requisite findings required by § 7553a, which usually happens after the weight-of-the-evidence hearing. 2016 VT 26, ¶ 9 .6 In Lontine, a single specially assigned Justice concluded that “[t]he statutory structure is sufficiently clear that the operative decision that triggers the sixty-day rule is the decision following the evidentiary hearing required under § 7553a.” Id. ¶ 22. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Bickel
green
1 sentence2020In State v. Bickel, a single- Justice order, the Court extended Passino’s holding to § 7553a and determined that a court can hold a defendant without bail pending a weight-of-the-evidence hearing. 166 Vt. 633, 634 , 698 8 A.2d 243 , 243-244 (1997) (mem.); see also State v. Morey, No. 2007-421, 2007 WL 5313609 , *2 (Vt. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Hance
green
2 sentences2017Likewise, we have ruled unconstitutional a statute authorizing cash-only bail, observing that the statute would "increase government power to engage in pretrial confinement, a result which cannot be reconciled with the history of the 'sufficient sureties' clause or our own cases discussing bail, in which we have recognized the threat to individual liberty inherent in pretrial detention." Hance , 2006 VT 97 , ¶ 17, 180 Vt. 357 , 910 A.2d 874 . *608 ¶ 20. 2017Likewise, we have ruled unconstitutional a statute authorizing cash-only bail, observing that the statute would "increase government power to engage in pretrial confinement, a result which cannot be reconciled with the history of the 'sufficient sureties' clause or our own cases discussing bail, in which we have recognized the threat to individual liberty inherent in pretrial detention." Hance , 2006 VT 97 , ¶ 17, 180 Vt. 357 , 910 A.2d 874 . *608 ¶ 20. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Breer
green
2 sentences2017The trial court's role during a bail hearing is not to adjudicate the merits of the case or to "litigat[e] [the] defendant's guilt prior to trial." State v. Breer , 2014 VT 132 , ¶ 8, 198 Vt. 629 , 112 A.3d 1273 (mem.); see also State v. Turnbaugh , 174 Vt. 532 , 534, 811 A.2d 662 , 665 (2002) (mem.) ("[I]t is not the role of the court in a bail review hearing to judge the State's case .... 2017The trial court's role during a bail hearing is not to adjudicate the merits of the case or to "litigat[e] [the] defendant's guilt prior to trial." State v. Breer , 2014 VT 132 , ¶ 8, 198 Vt. 629 , 112 A.3d 1273 (mem.); see also State v. Turnbaugh , 174 Vt. 532 , 534, 811 A.2d 662 , 665 (2002) (mem.) ("[I]t is not the role of the court in a bail review hearing to judge the State's case .... | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Lambert
green
2 sentences1995Id. at 318 , 487 A.2d at 173 . 1995Id. at 318 , 487 A.2d at 173 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.