S_JUD_2019A 01/30/2019 01:34:49 PM Committee Summary

Senator Gonzales, sponsor, explained SB19-030, concerning a remedy for improperly entered guilty pleas.  She discussed her reasons for introducing the bill, and the unanticipated problems noncitizens encounter with deferred judgment.  Senator Gonzales relayed instances in which deferred judgment for noncitizens does not clear charges but can, years or decades later, mean a denial of citizenship or deportation.  She reiterated that the consequences are often not adequately explained to the defendants. 

Senator Gonzales presented and discussed strike-below Amendment L. 001 (Attachment A).  She relayed that the amendment lays out a process for deferred judgment cases involving noncitizens.  She answered questions from the committee about a new fiscal note and reasons for the strike-below. 

Hans Meyer, representing himself as an immigration lawyer, spoke in favor of the bill.  He explained that the bill, as amended, provides procedural remedies to alleviate an unconstitutional guilty plea.  Mr. Meyer further reported that the amendment narrows the scope and provides a straightforward set of pleadings and responses for these cases. 

Bob Russell, representing the Denver District Attorney's Office, spoke in favor of the bill, as amended.  Mr. Russell agreed that noncitizen defendants often do not understand that their pleas have immigration consequences. 

Eric Johnson, representing the Immmigration Section of the Colorado Bar Association, spoke in favor of the bill.  He explained unconstitional pleas and deferred judgment.  He reiterated that immigration consequences are often not clearly laid out when explaining deferred judgment pleas to defendants.  He explained that  individuals who fail to comply with the terms of deferred judgment may bring up constitutional issues through 35(c) motions or other vehicles, as opposed to the defendants who comply with the terms and have no such recourse. 

Aaron Hall, an immigration attorney with the Joseph Law Firm, spoke in support of the bill.  He provided an example of a deferred judgment case he worked on with immigration consequences.  He expressed frustration that there was no available remedy to withdraw the plea. 

Kristi Englekirk, representing herself as a law student, spoke in favor of the bill.  She explained the research she conducted about deferred judgment and the lack of information provided to defendants about collateral consequences.

Tristan Gorman, representing the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, spoke in support of the bill.  She also explained that criminal defendants are not adequately advised of immigration consequences when entering into a deferred judgment plea.  She further discussed the ways in which immigration law is separate and different from criminal law.

Erica Cano, representing herself, spoke in support of the bill.  She relayed a personal experience in which a family member was facing deportation because of a deferred judgment that was successfully completed years ago. 

Senators Lee and Cooke, co-prime sponsors, explained SB19-036, concerning requiring the state court administrator to administer a program to remind criminal defendants to appear in court as scheduled.  Senator Cooke discussed jail overcrowding and failure to appear (FTA) warrants.  He discussed how the bill would set up a court date reminder program in the office of the State Court Administrator in an effort to decrease FTA warrants and increase court efficiences.  Senator Lee noted that court reminder programs in other jurisdictions have proven success rates and that the bill is a collaborative effort between the Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).  Senator Cooke reported that the bail bond industry was in support of the measure as well. 

Chris Johnson, representing the County Sheriffs of Colorado, spoke in favor of the bill.  He explained that many metro counties already have court reminder programs in place that have proven to free-up jail bed space for those who need it. 

Chris Ryan, State Court Administrator in the Judicial Department, spoke in support of the bill.  He explained that increased court attendance results in court efficiencies.  He answered questions from the committee about a broader application of the reminder program, such as for probation and municipal courts, as well as contacting defendants if there is a weather delay. 

Julie Reskin, representing the Colorado Cross Disability Coalition, spoke in favor of the bill.  She explained that some people with disabilities have impaired memories.

Fran Maes, representing the Colorado Cross Disability Coalition, testified in support of the bill.  She noted that some people with disabilities cannot keep dates and times straight and are not intentionally missing court dates. 

Maureen Cain, representing the Office of the State Public Defender, spoke in favor of the bill.  She recommended an amendment regarding consent to solely use defendant contact information for program purposes only.  She also recommended an amendment clarifying that if a court date is missed, the text may not state that a warrant is out for arrest.  Instead, the text should read to contact a lawyer. 

Tim Lane, representing the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, spoke in favor of the bill.  He agreed to work with Ms. Cain on the proposed amendments. 

Denise Maes, representing the ACLU, spoke in support of the bill.  She discussed the benefits of the bill and agreed with the amendments suggested by Ms. Cain. 

Allison Daley, representing Colorado Counties Inc, testified in support of the bill. She discussed over-crowded jails in counties.

Tristan Gorman, representing the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, spoke in favor of the bill and the proposed amendments.  She explained that the bill would cut down on unintentional FTAs.

Senator Lee requested that the bill be laid over to work on amendments.   The Chair laid the bill over until a later date.