State v. James C. Lohr, 236 A.3d 1277

Defendant James Lohr was charged with aggravated and simple assault and initially released on conditions (no contact; 300-foot distance).
After an alleged conditions violation, a superior court held Lohr without bail under 13 V.S.A. § 7553a (public-safety detention) and ordered a trial within 60 days under Vt. Const. ch. II, § 40 and 13 V.S.A. § 7553b.
COVID-19 court suspensions made a 60-day trial impossible; the State conceded § 40/§ 7553b applied but argued the court was required to "set bail" (requested $50,000).
The superior court instead conducted a 13 V.S.A. § 7554 analysis (risk of flight/conditions) and released Lohr on conditions without imposing monetary bail.
The State appealed, arguing (1) §§ 40/7553b mandate imposition of bail when the 60‑day deadline passes and (2) the court abused its discretion by releasing Lohr without bail; the Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the § 40/§ 7553b command that the court "shall set bail" requires the court to impose monetary bail when a § 7553a detainee's trial does not start within 60 days	"Shall set bail" means the court must impose bail (e.g., $50,000) once 60 days lapse	The phrase is ambiguous in context; the court must follow § 7554 risk-of-flight framework and may set $0 bail if no flight risk	The phrase is ambiguous; courts must hold a § 7554 hearing and determine risk of flight; bail may be $0 when justified
Whether the superior court abused its discretion by releasing Lohr without monetary bail under § 7554	The court erred because Lohr had flight-risk indicia and had earlier been held without bail under § 7553a	The court properly found risk of flight mitigable by nonmonetary conditions (motel placement, staff supervision, curfew, health ties) and did not err	No abuse of discretion; record supports conclusion that nonmonetary conditions reasonably mitigated flight risk and $0 bail was permissible

State v. Lontine, 201 Vt. 637, 142 A.3d 1058 (Vt. 2016) (addressing the 60-day rule's applicability)
State v. Blackmer, 160 Vt. 451, 631 A.2d 1134 (Vt. 1993) (discussing presumption of flight risk in life‑imprisonment cases)
State v. Pratt, 204 Vt. 282, 166 A.3d 600 (Vt. 2017) (monetary bail’s sole legitimate purpose is to assure appearance)
Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1951) (bail set higher than reasonably calculated to assure appearance is excessive)
United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (U.S. 1987) (pretrial detention is a carefully limited exception to liberty)
State v. Yorkey, 163 Vt. 355, 657 A.2d 1079 (Vt. 1995) (give effect to every part of a statutory scheme)
State v. Rougeau, 209 A.3d 599 (Vt. 2019) (standard of review for § 7554 release orders)