Date: 02/22/2010

Final
BILL SUMMARY for HB10-1201

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Votes: View--> Action Taken:
Adopt prepared amendment L.002 (Attachment B). Th
Adopt prepared amendment L.003 (Attachment C), whi
Adopt prepared amendment L.005 (Attachment D). Th
Refer House Bill 10-1201, as amended, to the Commi
Pass Without Objection
Pass Without Objection
Pass Without Objection
PASS



02:19 PM -- House Bill 10-1201

Representative Middleton, prime sponsor, presented House Bill 10-1201 concerning duties related to peace officer contacts. The bill requires a law enforcement officer intending to perform a consensual search of a person, vehicle, or home to orally advise the individual of their right to refuse such a search. The officer must have written consent before proceeding. The consent requirement only applies to searches for which there is no other legal basis. Representative Middleton stated that the bill simply provides a standard and uniform approach to consent searches. She stressed that it clarifies an existing right rather than creating a new right. She distributed prepared amendments L.002, L.003, and L.005 (Attachments B, C, and D).

100222AttachB.pdf100222AttachC.pdf100222AttachD.pdf

02:26 PM --
Arthur Way, Colorado Progressive Coalition (CPC), spoke in support of the bill. Mr. Way explained that the racial justice program at the CPC focuses on issues of police accountability. The CPC runs a racial profiling and police discrimination hotline. He stated that the bill represents a policy that should improve the relationship between communities of color and police by simply asking law enforcement officials to affirm the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in their interactions with civilians. The bill also provides an ounce of regulation in an area of wide discretion in order to gain pounds of clarity and uniformity regarding police policy and the individual rights of citizens. He believes the bill has the potential to slow and even end the gross overrepresentation of minorities in the prison system. He spoke at length about the problem of racial profiling.

02:36 PM --
Harry Smith, representing himself, spoke in support of the bill. Mr. Smith discussed the practice of Colorado law enforcement officials who stop people of color for no apparent reason. He related details about his experience with multiple law enforcement stops that he believes were unjustified.

02:45 PM --
Carlos Valverde, representing himself, spoke in support of the bill. Mr. Valverde discussed his experience growing up on the west side of Denver. He explained that he grew up fearing and hating the police. He provided details of his experience with a law enforcement stop that he believes was racially-motivated.

02:52 PM --
Lorena Garcia, representing herself, spoke in support of the bill. Ms. Garcia related details of her experience with a situation with law enforcement officers that she believes was motivated by her appearance.

02:57 PM -- Mark Randall, Colorado District Attorneys' Council (CDAC), spoke in opposition to the bill. Mr. Randall discussed the constitutional implications of the bill. He stated his belief that the bill creates inconsistency that will engender litigation. He expressed his opinion that existing constitutional and case law provisions provide adequate guidelines for law enforcement. He spoke extensively about the body of case law on the subject of voluntary consent to be searched. Mr. Randall responded to questions from the committee.

03:19 PM --
Rod Walker, Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police and the Colorado Springs Police Department, took a neutral position on the bill. Deputy Chief Walker stated that the bill contains best practices for police departments with regard to consensual searches. He responded to questions from the committee about video cameras on police cruisers.

03:25 PM --
Doug Darr, County Sheriffs of Colorado, spoke in opposition to the bill. Sheriff Darr reiterated the testimony of Mr. Randall. He stressed that racial profiling is wrong and law enforcement officers receive adequate training on the subject. He talked about the high number of injuries to officers that occur as a result of vehicle or pedestrian stops. He would like to see data from jurisdictions other than the City and County of Denver regarding illegal searches. Sheriff Darr expressed his opinion that the passage of the bill will negatively impact the safety of law enforcement officers.

03:31 PM --
Deb Wilke, Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Board and Colorado Attorney General's Office, spoke in opposition to the bill. Ms. Wilke discussed the waiver of 4th Amendment rights through a consent to search. She talked about training requirements established by the POST Board related to consensual searches and other law enforcement contacts. She also spoke about anti-bias training that all police officers receive in Colorado.

03:35 PM --
Dan May, 4th Judicial District, spoke in opposition to the bill. Mr. May is the district attorney in El Paso and Teller counties. He provided information about case law around consensual contact with police officers and the right to refuse a search. He expressed particular concern about the effect of the bill on security in airports and military installations.

03:45 PM --
Pete Hautzinger, CDAC, spoke in opposition to the bill. Mr. Hautzinger stated his opinion that racial profiling is a horrible thing, but voluntary consent has nothing to do with racial profiling. He discussed the problem his district has had with methamphetamine. He expressed his belief that the bill would hamper the ability of law enforcement in his district to investigate and stop the distribution and sale of methamphetamine. He indicated that not all cases are alike and the state should not mandate a "one size fits all" approach.

03:54 PM --
Mark Silverstein, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Colorado, spoke in support of the bill. Mr. Silverstein discussed the history of Miranda rights and compared those rights to the types of rights covered by the bill. He stressed that the majority of cases involving consensual searches are not examined by a court because no illegal items are found during the search. He talked about racial and ethnic disparities in police requests for consensual searches. Mr. Silverstein stated that the bill does not remove a police officer's right to search. He provided information about jurisdictions that have banned consensual searches. He responded to questions from the committee.

04:05 PM --
Joseph Salazar, Colorado Latino Forum, spoke in support of the bill. Mr. Salazar commented about the testimony of prior witnesses regarding searches linked to racial profiling. He indicated that this bill is in line with the provisions of the U.S. Constitution and the Colorado constitution. He expressed confusion about the fact that the bill contains best practices that are supported by many of the prior opposition witnesses, although those same witnesses do not want the best practices codified in law. Mr. Salazar provided details of his personal experience with a traffic stop that he believes was racially-motivated.

04:15 PM --
Doug Wilson, Colorado State Public Defender, spoke in support of the bill. Mr. Wilson discussed the constitutional implications of the bill at length. He talked about racial profiling in Colorado. He pointed out that the bill does not extend any 4th Amendment rights that do not currently exist. Mr. Wilson responded to questions from the committee.

04:29 PM --
Maureen Cain, Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, spoke in support of the bill. Ms. Cain stated that the bill originated in the community and not with attorneys. She discussed the process by which the bill was drafted.

04:33 PM --
Gregory Staritzky, representing himself, spoke in support of the bill. Mr. Staritzky distributed information to the committee about warrantless searches of persons and places (Attachment E). He shared details of his experience with police stops. He indicated that he has always felt unable to decline a consensual search because of his concerns about the consequences.

100222AttachE.pdf
BILL:HB10-1201
TIME: 04:43:55 PM
MOVED:Court
MOTION:Adopt prepared amendment L.002 (Attachment B). The amendment was amended by prepared amendment L.003. The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:Kagan
VOTE
Court
Gardner B.
Kagan
King S.
Miklosi
Nikkel
Pace
Ryden
Waller
McCann
Levy
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:HB10-1201
TIME: 04:46:44 PM
MOVED:Court
MOTION:Adopt prepared amendment L.005 (Attachment D). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:McCann
VOTE
Court
Gardner B.
Kagan
King S.
Miklosi
Nikkel
Pace
Ryden
Waller
McCann
Levy
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:HB10-1201
TIME: 04:44:26 PM
MOVED:Court
MOTION:Adopt prepared amendment L.003 (Attachment C), which amends prepared amendment L.002. Members of the committee commented about the amendment. The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:Kagan
VOTE
Court
Gardner B.
Kagan
King S.
Miklosi
Nikkel
Pace
Ryden
Waller
McCann
Levy
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:HB10-1201
TIME: 04:47:07 PM
MOVED:Court
MOTION:Refer House Bill 10-1201, as amended, to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation. The motion passed on a vote of 7-4.
SECONDED:Kagan
VOTE
Court
Yes
Gardner B.
No
Kagan
Yes
King S.
No
Miklosi
Yes
Nikkel
No
Pace
Yes
Ryden
Yes
Waller
No
McCann
Yes
Levy
Yes
Final YES: 7 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS




02:16 PM

Representative Levy recessed the committee.