A decision handed down last week by three Vermont Supreme Court justices, in their ruling on a bail review appeal for Alexander Stolte, is precedent-setting, ac­cording to Randolph attorney Kelly Green.

Green, who works for the Office of the Defender General in Montpe­lier, was until recently working in the office of defense attorney Dan Sedon of Chelsea. It was she who argued the Stolte appeal before the Vermont Supreme Court justices in December.

“This case can be applied broadly and is actually really exciting,” Atty. Green said yesterday.

The ruling, she explained, will open the door for defense attor­neys to challenge the evidence prosecutors submit to meet the standard that is required to hold a suspect without bail. The standard, as enshrined in state law and the Vermont Constitution, requires, vaguely, that evidence of guilt be “great.”

To meet the standard. pros­ecutors must produce some evi­Ruling dence—prima facie or “first glance” evidence—on every element of a criminal charge

According to Green, “It is very little evidence.”

Until now, she added, “A lot of attorneys felt like their hands were tied,” because it seemed that any evidence they might produce for a bail review hearing would be dis­missed as “modifying evidence.”

“This case makes it plain that is not the case—that there is some evidence that is not ‘modifying,’” Green said.

More importantly, she added, the new ruling seems to back defense’s contention that the standard set for determining whether to hold with­out bail fails to meet Vermont Con­stitutional muster.

“The defense bar is going to be looking for a case that will put this same issue squarely before a fivejustice panel,” Green predicted. “That opens up the whole process to a higher standard; we are mov­ing the whole bail process closer to what the state Constitution re­quires.”