Skip to main content
Colorado General AssemblyToggle Main Menu
Agency NameToggle Agency Menu

h_jud_2016a_2016-04-05t13:36:46z2 Hearing Summary

Date: 04/05/2016



Final

BILL SUMMARY for SB16-102



HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY


Votes: View--> Action Taken:
Adopt amendment L.004 (Attachment G). The motion p

Refer Senate Bill 16-102, as amended, to the Commi
PASS

PASS







03:27 PM -- SB16-102



Representative Moreno, prime sponsor, presented Senate Bill 16-102, concerning the elimination of mandatory sentences to incarceration for certain crimes. Representative Moreno explained the effect of the bill and discussed its need. Representative Moreno responded to questions regarding the effect of the bill on the sentencing ranges for the crimes covered by the bill, and the reasons why certain crimes were included in the scope of the bill. The following persons testified regarding SB 16-102:



03:34 PM --
Mr. Tom Raynes, representing the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Raynes discussed the history of addressing mandatory minimum sentences and judicial discretion, and the crimes selected for inclusion in the bill. Mr. Raynes rebutted common arguments against mandatory minimum sentences. Discussion ensued regarding dialogue surrounding potential reductions in certain mandatory minimum sentences, and the merits of reducing the sentences for the specific crimes covered by SB 16-102.





03:48 PM



Discussion ensued regarding the potential for additional dialogue on mandatory minimum sentencing among stakeholders, and the effectiveness of the Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ). Mr. Raynes responded to questions regarding assault with a deadly weapon.



03:56 PM --
Mr. Michael Dougherty, representing the First Judicial District and the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, testified in opposition to SB 16-102. Mr. Dougherty discussed the seriousness of the crimes covered by the bill, and the implications of the legislature not setting minimum sentences for crimes. Discussion ensued regarding the range of behavior covered by second degree assault, and who should be responsible for setting criminal sentencing ranges.





04:09 PM



Mr. Dougherty responded to questions regarding how certain crimes are charged by prosecutors.



04:11 PM --
Sheriff Chris Johnson, representing the County Sheriffs of Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. Sheriff Johnson responded to questions regarding how mandatory minimum sentences impact law enforcement.



04:12 PM --
Ms. Tara Koumantakis, representing Project Safeguard, testified regarding the bill. Ms. Koumantakis explained how victims are granted a sense of protection by mandatory minimum sentences. Ms. Koumantakis responded to questions regarding the potential for amending the bill to address her concerns, and the portion of the bill to which she objects.



04:20 PM --
Mr. Scott Turner, representing the Office of the Attorney General, testified in opposition to SB 16-102. Mr. Turner discussed the prerogative of the General Assembly to address sentencing ranges, and the potential for CCJJ to address sentencing reform. Discussion ensued regarding the ability of CCJJ to address sentencing reform in the near future.



04:26 PM --
Ms. Lydia Waligorski, representing the Colorado Coalition Against Domestic Violence, testified regarding the bill, noting some concerns her organization has with the bill. She responded to questions from the committee.



04:31 PM --
Ms. Lisa Wayne, representing the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Wayne provided information regarding intent to cause serious bodily injury. She also discussed judicial discretion relating to sentencing guidelines. Ms. Wayne responded to questions from the committee regarding protecting victims, the appropriateness of mandatory minimums, and incarceration trends.



04:41 PM --
Mr. Nathan Ojanen, representing the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, testified in support of SB 16-102. Mr. Ojanen discussed the facts surrounding a case he litigated. Mr. Ojanen responded to questions regarding the factors considered in taking a plea in the case, and the resulting sentence the defendant received.



04:50 PM --
Ms. Andrea Hall, representing herself as a defense attorney, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Hall discussed the facts of a case she litigated involving a mandatory minimum sentencing scheme.



04:54 PM --
Mr. Josh Tolini, representing the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, testified in support of SB 16-102. Mr. Tolini discussed the facts of a case he litigated involving a mandatory minimum sentencing scheme, as well as cases involving service members. Mr. Tolini responded to questions regarding how mandatory minimum sentencing schemes affect litigation strategy, and the ability of a judge to intervene in the process observed in sentencing for a second-degree assault case. Mr. Tolini responded to questions regarding his litigation strategy for the case he described.



05:07 PM --
Mr. Alex Garlin, representing the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Garlin discussed the facts of a case he litigated involving a mandatory minimum sentencing scheme.



05:13 PM --
Mr. Patrick Mulligan, representing the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Mulligan discussed a number of cases he litigated involving mandatory minimum sentencing schemes. Mr. Mulligan responded to questions regarding the frequency with which a judge will entertain a motion to reconsider a mandatory minimum sentence.



05:21 PM --
Ms. Carrie Thompson, representing the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Thompson addressed earlier discussions about the CCJJ taking up sentencing reform, and explained why the crimes covered by SB 16-102 were selected for inclusion in the bill. Ms. Thompson discussed the facts of a case involving a mandatory minimum sentence, and costs associated with incarceration. Discussion ensued regarding amendments made to the bill in the Senate, and her organization's position on a potential amendment. Ms. Thompson responded to further questions regarding potential future attempts at addressing sentencing reform.





05:37 PM



Discussion continued regarding amendments made to SB 16-102 in the Senate.





05:42 PM



Representative Carver explained the effect of amendment L.004 (Attachment G). Discussion ensued regarding the effect and merits of the amendment.



16HouseJud0405AttachG.pdf16HouseJud0405AttachG.pdf

BILL: SB16-102
TIME: 05:43:57 PM
MOVED: Carver
MOTION: Adopt amendment L.004 (Attachment G). The motion passed on a vote of 9-2.
SECONDED: Lee
VOTE
Carver
Yes
Court
Yes
Dore
Yes
Foote
Yes
Lawrence
Yes
Lundeen
Yes
Melton
No
Salazar
Yes
Willett
No
Lee
Yes
Kagan
Yes
YES: 9 NO: 2 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS





06:01 PM



Representative Moreno provided closing remarks in support of SB 16-102. Various members provided their positions on the bill.

BILL: SB16-102
TIME: 06:02:55 PM
MOVED: Court
MOTION: Refer Senate Bill 16-102, as amended, to the Committee on Appropriations. The motion passed on a vote of 7-4.
SECONDED: Salazar
VOTE
Carver
No
Court
Yes
Dore
Yes
Foote
No
Lawrence
No
Lundeen
Yes
Melton
Yes
Salazar
Yes
Willett
No
Lee
Yes
Kagan
Yes
Final YES: 7 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS







06:20 PM



The committee recessed.




COVID-19 Resources
2021 Ballot Information Booklet (Blue Book)
NORTH ENTRANCE IS CURRENTLY CLOSED.  TO ENTER THE CAPITOL, USE THE SOUTH ENTRANCE, UNDER THE STAIRS, AT 14th AVENUE AND SHERMAN STREET.