H.409 would codify bail‑revocation steps; public defender says parts conflict with Vermont Supreme Court

Summary

Committee review of H.409, an act to establish procedures for pretrial bail revocation, centered on questions about constitutional limits, evidentiary standards, judge-initiated motions, warrantless arrest language, bail forfeiture and a 60‑day trial deadline. Witnesses warned several provisions may conflict with Vermont Supreme Court precedent.

A draft bill, H.409, to set detailed procedures for revoking pretrial bail drew extensive legal critique at a Judiciary committee hearing March 12, with a public defender and legislative counsel differing on scope and constitutional risk.

Eric Fitzpatrick of the Office of Legislative Council told the committee the bill “creates a procedure for bail revocation” and aims to align revocation standards and procedures with relevant Vermont Supreme Court requirements. Rebecca Turner, a public defender with the Office of the Defender General, said the bill is “alarming” and that several provisions are inconsistent with Vermont case law and defendants’ constitutional protections.

The bill would (per the draft presented to the panel) do two things: add a defined procedure for motions to revoke bail and provide a statutory definition of what it means for a defendant’s conduct to “disrupt the prosecution.” Under the draft, either a prosecutor or the court could move to revoke bail; the State would bear the burden of proof by a preponderance of the…

H.409 would codify bail‑revocation steps; public defender says parts conflict with Vermont Supreme Court

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading