Judge Jennifer Barrett listens to testimony opposing her confirmation during a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting last month in the Vermont Statehouse. File photo by Riley Robinson/VTDigger

A Superior Court judge dismissed a criminal case on Tuesday on the grounds that Orleans County prosecutors โ€” including newly appointed Judge Jennifer Barrett โ€” failed to disclose crucial evidence.

Judge Lisa Warren of the Orleans County Superior criminal court reversed a conviction in the case prosecuted by Barrett, who was serving as Orleans County stateโ€™s attorney and is now a Superior Court judge in Windham County. Warren described the failure to disclose evidence as โ€œinexcusableโ€ and part of a โ€œpattern of neglect.โ€

David Vaz, of Springfield, Massachusetts, was convicted by a jury last summer of aggravated assault, kidnapping and unlawful restraint stemming from a 2017 incident in Lowell.

Vaz was due for sentencing in January. His attorney, Joshua Stern, said he received documents shortly before then from the Orleans County Stateโ€™s Attorneyโ€™s Office, now led by Farzana Leyva. 

Leyvaโ€™s office told Stern that prosecutors thought the documents had already been disclosed but shared them โ€œout of an abundance of caution,โ€ Stern said.

The documents were probable cause affidavits for a separate criminal case against Damion Daniels, a prominent witness in the trial against Vaz, who has been jailed since 2018. According to Warrenโ€™s decision, those affidavits included evidence that Daniels made false statements to police. Stern said that information could have been used during trial to discount Danielsโ€™ testimony.

But Stern and Vazโ€™s prior attorney, Zachery Weight, reviewed the case and found no evidence that Barrett disclosed the affidavits. 

Barrett began serving as Orleans County stateโ€™s attorney in 2015 and was appointed as a Superior Court judge by Gov. Phil Scott in August 2022. She left the stateโ€™s attorneyโ€™s office after the appointment.

According to Warrenโ€™s decision, Barrett and Deputy Stateโ€™s Attorney Michael Cricchi tried Vazโ€™s case before a jury. 

โ€œThe disclosure should have been made while (Barrett) was the lead attorney on the case,โ€ Stern said.

After receiving the documents from Leyvaโ€™s office in January, Stern filed a motion to dismiss. Warren granted the request on Tuesday.

โ€œThe discovery violation in this case is clear, serious, and inexcusable,โ€ Warren wrote in the decision. โ€œIt is not an isolated incident, but rather appears to be a pattern of neglect in discovery practices, which has continued since the late disclosure in the instant case.โ€

In an email Wednesday afternoon, Leyva said she took the matter โ€œextremely seriously and (is) reviewing the facts.โ€ She declined further comment on the case, citing the pending litigation. 

In response to the judgeโ€™s assertion of โ€œa pattern of neglect,โ€ Leyva wrote that she was โ€œunaware of any systemic discovery violations cited by the court.โ€

Barrett could not be reached for comment on Wednesday. Messages left with the Windham family court and at two email addresses for her were not returned.

Warren wrote that her decision โ€œis not meant to undercut the accuracy of the juryโ€™s verdict, which may well have been correct in all respects. However, the court must ensure that all defendants receive due process, and the Stateโ€™s discovery failures have hindered due process in this case.โ€

In an interview, Stern called the failure to disclose documents โ€œincredibly serious conduct.โ€

โ€œI think that a defendant’s right to information that is exculpatory or information that is impeaching with respect to state witnesses is an incredibly important right,โ€ he said.

Because the Legislature was not in session at the time, Barrett began serving as a judge immediately following Scottโ€™s appointment last summer. But she wasnโ€™t confirmed until last month โ€” and only following a lengthy debate that is atypical for judicial confirmations.

At hearings of the Senate Judiciary Committee, several defense attorneys spoke against Barrettโ€™s confirmation, with some arguing that she had a history of overzealous prosecution that suggested she would be unfair as a judge. 

Others raised concerns about Barrettโ€™s approach to prosecution and the impact on Vermonters of color, especially Black Vermonters.

Vaz is described as a Black man in court records from his trial.

Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale, D/P-Chittenden Southeast, said during a debate on the Senate floor that she took issue with Barrettโ€™s aggressive style and its impact on people of color, such as herself. 

โ€œBlack Vermonters do feel really unheard in the decision that we’re about to make,โ€ Ram Hinsdale said, speaking ahead of Barrettโ€™s confirmation vote.

Senate Minority Leader Randy Brock, R-Franklin, who is Black, objected to that notion, saying there is โ€œno such thing as Black Vermonters who speak with a single voice.โ€ He voiced his support for Barrettโ€™s confirmation.

Some also took issue with Barrettโ€™s support of her husband, Lewis Hatch, a former Vermont State Police trooper who was fired after conducting numerous drug searches without justification. Hatchโ€™s stop of a Black man, Gregory Zullo, rose to the Vermont Supreme Court. The state was held responsible for an unreasonable search and seizure.

One of the defense attorneys who argued against Barrettโ€™s confirmation, Kelly Green, said she was troubled by the revelations included in Warrenโ€™s ruling on Tuesday. Among the key concerns raised during Barrettโ€™s confirmation hearings was โ€œher track record with respect to pursuing equity,โ€ Green said in an interview on Wednesday. โ€œSo when I saw this decision, I was pretty depressed.โ€

Green also pointed out one of Vermontโ€™s rules of professional conduct for attorneys, which says that a prosecutor shall โ€œmake timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense.โ€

Vaz remains jailed at Northern State Correctional Facility in Newport. On Wednesday, Cricchi, the deputy stateโ€™s attorney, filed a motion to pause action on the case, citing a pending appeal of Warrenโ€™s decision. In response, Stern argued that Warrenโ€™s ruling should take effect immediately.

โ€œIt’s deeply troubling to me that he was held without any conviction for almost five years to begin with, so I think he’s long overdue for being released,โ€ Stern said.

Previously VTDigger's northwest and substance use disorder reporter.