Case Title: State v. Ely

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 1998-10-09T00:00:00Z

Document:
State v. Ely  (98-451); 168 Vt. 614; 724 A.2d 443

[Filed 9-Oct-1998]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                       SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 98-451

                            SEPTEMBER TERM, 1998

State of Vermont                      }       APPEALED FROM:
                                      }
                                      }
     v.                               }       District Court of Vermont
                                      }       Unit No. 3, Caledonia Circuit
Shawn Allen Ely                       }
                                      }       DOCKET NO. 1074-12-95Cacr

       In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       Appellant Wanda Allard, a material witness in this criminal
  proceeding, is presently incarcerated due to her inability to post the
  $50,000 cash bail set by the district court to secure her appearance at
  trial.  She invokes 13 V.S.A. § 7556(b) to seek review of the district
  court's bail determination.  I conclude that this matter is not within the
  single-justice jurisdiction established by § 7556.

       By its terms, § 7556(b) applies to "a person [who] is detained after a
  court denies a motion under subsection (a) of this section (FN1) or when
  conditions of release have been imposed or amended by the judge of the
  court having original jurisdiction over the offense charged."  This 
  plainly contemplates appeals to a single justice of this court only of
  determinations under 13 V.S.A. § 7554, which applies exclusively to "[a]ny
  person charged with an offense" that is not covered by the more restrictive
  provisions in 13 V.S.A. §§ 7553 and 7553a (relating to felonies punishable
  by life imprisonment or involving violence against another person).  In
  contrast, the statute authorizing the detention at issue in this proceeding
  appears not in Chapter 229 of Title 13, covering bail, but in Chapter 203
  of Title 13, containing exclusively provisions relating to witnesses in
  criminal proceedings.  See 13 V.S.A. § 6605 (when witness "refuses" to
  enter into recognizance with surety" specified by court, "he may be
  committed to jail . . . on a warrant of the court or magistrate making the
  order, and there detained until such time as his attendance to testify is
  required.").

       In her written memorandum, appellant concedes that section 7556 does
  not explicitly authorize appeals relating to the detention of witnesses as
  opposed to defendants, but she contends that a failure to exercise
  single-justice jurisdiction in this case would lead to absurd or irrational
  results in contravention of the oft-stated maxim against so construing
  legislative enactments.  See Braun v. Board of Dental Examiners, ___ Vt.
  ___, ___,