Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

State of Vermont v. Ramone Hosten

Date: 02-01-2026

Case Number: 25-CR-11024

Judge: Robert W. Katims

Court: Superior Court, Chittenden County, Vermont

Plaintiff's Attorney: Chittenden County, Vermont, State's Attorney's Office

Defendant's Attorney: Click Here For The Best Burlington Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory

Description:
Burlington, Vermont, criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with aggravated domestic assault.

Defendant was charged with two offenses-first-degree aggravated domestic assault in violation of 13 V.S.A. § 1043(a)(1) and domestic assault in violation of 13 V.S.A. § 1042- alleging assaults of the complainant on or about September 19, 2025. The State applied for and obtained an arrest warrant for defendant on October 15, 2025. Defendant was arraigned on December 11, 2025, and held without bail pending a weight-of-the-evidence hearing. That hearing was held on January 7, 2025, and the trial court found, "taking [the evidence] in the light most favorable to the State and excluding modifying evidence, that [the complainant] did describe that she was subjected to being strangled by [defendant]."

"A defendant charged with a criminal offense is entitled to release on conditions pursuant to 13 V.S.A. § 7554, unless an exception applies under § 7553 or § 7553a." State v. Labor, No. 23-AP-288, 2023 WL 6290640, at *2 (Vt. Sept. 26, 2023) (unpub. mem.); see also State v. Shores, 2025 VT 62, ¶ 3 (noting two exceptions-§ 7553 and § 7553a-to the "general presumption of release").

To hold a defendant without bail prior to trial under 13 V.S.A. § 7553a, a court must find that (1) defendant is charged with a felony; (2) an element of that felony involves an act of violence against another; (3) the evidence of defendant's guilt is great; and- by a standard of clear and convincing evidence-that (4) defendant's release would pose a substantial threat of physical violence to any person; and (5) no condition or combination of conditions of release will reasonably prevent such violence.

State v. Sanborn, No. 2020-316, 2021 WL 75228, at *3 (Vt. Jan. 4, 2021) (unpub. mem.) (citing 13 V.S.A. § 7553a and State v. Lohr, 2020 VT 41, ¶ 14, 212 Vt. 289).
Outcome:
The trial court further found by clear and convincing evidence that defendant's release posed a substantial threat of physical violence to the public, and that no condition or combination of conditions of release would reasonably prevent the physical violence.


Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of State of Vermont v. Ramone Hosten?

The outcome was: The trial court further found by clear and convincing evidence that defendant's release posed a substantial threat of physical violence to the public, and that no condition or combination of conditions of release would reasonably prevent the physical violence. Affirmed

Which court heard State of Vermont v. Ramone Hosten?

This case was heard in Superior Court, Chittenden County, Vermont, VT. The presiding judge was Robert W. Katims.

Who were the attorneys in State of Vermont v. Ramone Hosten?

Plaintiff's attorney: Chittenden County, Vermont, State's Attorney's Office. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Burlington Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory.

When was State of Vermont v. Ramone Hosten decided?

This case was decided on February 1, 2026.