State v. Jack Sawyer, 187 A.3d 377

Jack Sawyer was charged with four counts alleging attempts to commit (aggravated) murder and first-degree murder for an alleged plan to carry out a mass shooting at Fair Haven Union High School; three counts carry life imprisonment.
He was detained and held without bail under 13 V.S.A. § 7553 because the constitutional presumption favoring release is flipped where the offense is punishable by life and the “evidence of guilt is great.”
Evidence presented at the weight-of-the-evidence hearing: Facebook messages threatening the school; a police interview in which Sawyer admitted planning a shooting, researching dates and tactics, and attempting to procure weapons via Bitcoin; a shotgun and ammunition found in his car; a journal labeled “The Journal of an Active Shooter” with entries describing plans and lists of needed materials.
Sawyer had not conducted surveillance at the school, had not yet purchased all weapons, had not observed the school resource officer in person, and had not taken any steps at the school itself.
The trial court held Sawyer without bail; Sawyer appealed, arguing the State’s evidence was insufficient on the attempt element under Vermont law.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the evidence is "great" to hold Sawyer without bail for attempted (aggravated) murder/first-degree murder	State: Sawyer’s admissions, journal, Facebook messages, weapons, and research constitute overt acts beyond mere preparation showing attempt	Sawyer: Acts were preparatory (planning, acquiring tools, research) and insufficient under Hurley to constitute an attempt	Reversed: Court held evidence did not meet Vermont’s attempt standard—acts were preparatory, not the commencement of consummation
Whether Vermont should apply a Model Penal Code "substantial-step" test (or allow abandonment)	State: urged view that preparatory acts, corroborated by other evidence, show attempt (cited MPC)	Sawyer: argued Hurley standard controls; abandonment not available under Vermont law	Court: Reaffirmed Hurley standard and rejected applying MPC substantial-step approach or treating abandonment as available; Vermont law requires acts proximate to consummation

State v. Hurley, 79 Vt. 28, 64 A. 78 (distinguishes mere preparation from attempt; proximity test)
State v. Devoid, 188 Vt. 445, 8 A.3d 1076 (overt act must advance beyond mere intent; abandonment not a defense)
State v. Duff, 151 Vt. 433, 563 A.2d 258 (weight-of-evidence standard for holding without bail under Ch. II, § 40 / § 7553)
State v. Boutin, 133 Vt. 531, 346 A.2d 531 (acts must reach commencement of consummation; holding bottle not an attempt)
State v. Woodmansee, 124 Vt. 387, 205 A.2d 407 (facts where an act—striking a match—would have consummated arson; attempt established)
State v. Synott, 178 Vt. 66, 872 A.2d 874 (abandonment does not negate guilt once overt acts in furtherance have occurred)
State v. Curtis, 157 Vt. 629, 603 A.2d 356 (attempt requires intent plus overt act designed to carry out intent)