Roughly halfway through the legislative session, around 30 bills relate to the courts or judiciary in some way. While it’s a small share of the 535 bills introduced as of publication, some of the proposed legislation could pack a mighty punch.
Two of the bills aim to address recent issues at the Colorado Bureau of Investigation. Following the recent internal probe and investigation into the work of former CBI forensic scientist Missy Woods, the investigatory body of the state announced March 3 it’s releasing independent investigations requested by Colorado Department of Public Safety Executive Director Stan Hilkey after a series of unrelated allegations were made against CBI Director Chris Schaefer.
The 1st Judicial District Attorney’s Office filed 102 charges against Woods earlier this year, including cybercrime, first-degree perjury, attempt to influence a public servant and forgery. None of the allegations made against Schaefer were sustained.
Last month, the CBI announced a new public dashboard on its website dedicated to tracking the agency’s progress in addressing the backlog of sexual assault kit testing. Senate Bill 25-170, introduced four days before the announcement from the CBI, seeks to address the delays in testing. The bill would require the CBI to spend specifically appropriated money on backlogged DNA evidence and sexual assault kit tests, and it would allow the CBI to contract with external labs to perform the testing. The bill also called for CBI to create the dashboard on the Department of Public Safety’s website to update the public on the backlog.
In its announcement of the dashboard, the CBI stated the demands of Woods’ internal investigation significantly impacted the sexual assault case backlog. The CBI noted that in 2024, approximately 50% of all DNA analysts’ lab time was spent reviewing the more than 10,000 cases Woods worked on during her 29-year career.
To address the DNA backlog, the CBI said it’s implementing a multi-pronged approach, including outsourcing 1,000 cases to private accredited laboratories.
The CBI noted the initiative was made possible by funding allocated by state lawmakers specifically to reduce the backlog. SB25-170 most recently passed through the House Committee on Appropriations and was referred unamended to the House Committee of the Whole.
Shortly before SB25-170, lawmakers in the House put forward a bill addressing misconduct complaints at forensic science labs. House Bill 25-1275 defines “knowing misconduct” and a “significant event” of misconduct, and would require an employee to report witnessed or discovered knowing misconduct or a significant event.
After an investigation of the alleged misconduct, the supervisor or director of the lab would need to notify each district attorney who has jurisdiction over a pending case, or a case that resulted in conviction, that the employee worked on about the reported wrongful action and provide the district attorney with access to information about the wrongful action.
Bill Number: HB25-1294
Title: Court Costs Assessed to Juveniles
Introduced: March 4
Sponsors: J. Jackson, J. Joseph, T. Exum
Summary: Under current law, courts may not assess or collect administrative fees, costs and surcharges in juvenile delinquency cases involving a juvenile under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court when a juvenile has been charged with or adjudicated of certain crimes. The bill prohibits the courts or the state from assessing or collecting any administrative fees, costs and surcharges assessed against a juvenile who is under 18 years of age when the crime was committed and under 21 years of age when sentenced or the juvenile’s parents, guardian or legal custodian.
Bill Number: SB25-189
Title: Require Jury to Determine Prior Convictions
Introduced: March 3
Sponsors: L. Liston, M. Snyder, M. Soper, C. Espenoza
Summary: Under existing law, a person convicted of certain prior offenses may be adjudged a habitual criminal and subject to enhanced sentencing. A jury determines whether the defendant committed the substantive offense charged, and the trial judge determines whether the defendant has been previously convicted as alleged. The bill requires a jury to determine whether the defendant has been previously convicted as alleged for the purpose of determining whether the defendant is a habitual criminal.
Bill Number: HB25-1275
Title: Forensic Science Integrity
Introduced: Feb. 19
Sponsors: M. Soper, Y. Zokaie, M. Weissman, L. Frizell
Summary: The bill defines “knowing misconduct” as a voluntary act or omission or series of acts or omissions consciously performed by a crime laboratory employee as a result of effort or determination in which the employee is aware that the employee’s conduct is improper and deceptive. The bill defines a “significant event” as an act or omission by an employee that is a gross deviation from the standard operation procedures or accreditation requirements of the crime laboratory, or requirements in law that were applicable at the time of the act or omission of the employee, that could substantially negatively affect the integrity of the crime laboratory activities. Among other provisions, the bill requires an employee to report witnessed or discovered knowing misconduct or a significant event to the director of the crime laboratory or to the employee’s immediate supervisor, who shall report it to the director. After an investigation of the alleged misconduct, the supervisor or director needs to notify each district attorney who has jurisdiction over a pending case, or a case that resulted in conviction, that the employee worked on about the reported wrongful action and provide the district attorney with access to information about the wrongful action.
Bill Number: SB25-185
Title: Claims Against Construction Professionals
Introduced: Feb. 27
Sponsors: R. Rodriguez, B. Pelton
Summary: The bill clarifies that construction professionals owe an independent tort duty of care to construct residential homes in a non-defective and reasonable manner, and that this duty is owed equally to original and subsequent residential home purchasers.
Bill Number: HB25-1261
Title: Consumers Construction Defect Action
Introduced: Feb. 18
Sponsors: J. Bacon, R. Rodriguez, F. Winter
Summary: In an action against a construction professional, the bill requires the construction professional to provide the claimant or the claimant’s legal representative with: copies of all plans, specifications, soils reports and available engineering calculations; any maintenance and preventive maintenance recommendations; the name, last-known address and scope of work of each construction professional that performed work or services; and copies of all insurance policies held by the construction professional during the appropriate time. The construction professional may charge reasonable copying costs for the documents. Failure to provide the identifying information of the other construction professionals bars the construction professional from designating the unidentified construction professionals as nonparties at fault in any subsequent action. Among other provisions, the bill also requires a court to award prejudgement interest of 8% to a prevailing claimant who alleges defects in a residential property construction.
Law Week’s legislative tracking is done through State Bill, a product of our publisher, Circuit Media.