House Committee on Judiciary (03/31/2015)

Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Date:	03/31/2015	ATTENDANCE

Time:	01:35 PM to 10:07 PM	Buckner	X
		Carver	X
Place:	RM 271	Court	X
		Dore	X
This Meeting was called to order by		Foote	X
	Representative Kagan	Lawrence	X
		Lundeen	X
This Report was prepared by		Pettersen	X
	Bo Pogue	Salazar	X
		Van Winkle	X
		Willett	X
		Lee	X
		Kagan	X
		X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call

Bills Addressed:		Action Taken:
HB15-1285 HB15-1290 HB15-1289 HB15-1287 HB15-1289		Amended, Referred to Appropriations Witness Testimony and/or Committee Discussion Only Amended, Referred to the Committee of the Whole Amended, Referred to Appropriations Amended, Referred to the Committee of the Whole

01:36 PM -- HB15-1285

The committee was called to order. A quorum was present. Representatives Kagan and Williams, prime sponsors, presented House Bill 15-1285, concerning use of body-worn cameras by law enforcement officers, and, in connection therewith, establishing a grant program and study group to recommend policies on the use of body-worn cameras. Representative Williams discussed the benefits of police officers wearing body cameras. Representative Kagan discussed the effect of the bill, and also discussed both the merits and drawbacks of police wearing cameras.

01:45 PM

The following persons testified regarding HB 15-1285:

01:46 PM -- Sheriffs Chad Day and Lou Vallario, representing the County Sheriffs of Colorado, testified in support of the bill. Sheriff Day discussed the costs associated with equipping police officers with cameras, and the merits of the grant program to be established under the bill. Sheriff Vallario discussed certain legal considerations in equipping police with cameras, and the diverse communities served by sheriffs. Representative Lee suggested that the sheriffs forward their concerns to the study group to be created under the bill. Representative Kagan responded to questions regarding the scope of hardware and software to be funded under the grant program created by the bill. Sheriff Day responded to questions regarding the number of sheriffs' departments that are equipped with body cameras, and incidences where cameras may not be functioning. Sheriff Day responded to further questions regarding alternative funding sources for equipping police with cameras, such as federal grants. Sheriff Vallario provided input on this issue.

01:58 PM

Representative Willett discussed the benefits of using police-worn body cameras.

01:59 PM -- Chief Jeff Streeter, representing the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police and the Colorado Municipal League, testified in support of the bill. Chief Streeter provided information on the scope of body-worn camera use in Colorado, and discussed the benefits of providing officers with cameras. Chief Streeter discussed certain technological difficulties associated with equipping officers with body-worn cameras, and the equipment to be purchased by the grant program created by the bill. He discussed the costs associated with using body-worn cameras. Chief Streeter provided an overview of the camera program operated by his office, and spoke in support of a forthcoming amendment. Chief Streeter responded to questions regarding grants defraying the costs of using body-worn cameras, and the ability of the grant fund to cover such costs.

02:09 PM

Discussion continued regarding the ability of Chief Streeter's department to cover the costs of implementing a body-worn camera program. Chief Streeter responded to questions regarding the impact of implementing this program on citizen complaints against his department. Discussion ensued regarding a forthcoming amendment to the bill. Chief Streeter responded to questions regarding public input in the rule-making process associated with implementing body-worn camera use.

02:19 PM -- Mr. Mark Hurlbert, representing the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, testified in support of the bill, as amended by amendment L.003 (Attachment A). Mr. Hurlbert explained how the bill will restore confidence in law enforcement.

15HouseJud0331AttachA.pdf

02:21 PM -- Ms. Maureen Cain, representing the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, testified in support of HB 15-1285. Ms. Cain discussed the benefits of having incidents recorded on cameras, and weighed the pros and cons of police body-worn cameras. Ms. Cain clarified her support for a particular provision in the bill, and provided her position on certain forthcoming amendments. Ms. Cain responded to questions regarding how violations of body worn-camera policies will be addressed under the bill. Discussion ensued on this point. Ms. Cain reiterated her support for a particular provision in the bill.

02:33 PM

Representative Kagan responded to questions regarding the nexus between the grants offered under HB 15-1285 and policies adopted by the study group created under the bill. Discussion ensued regarding the ability of police departments with diverse economic means to participate in the grant program under the bill. Discussion returned to the nexus between the grants offered under HB 15-1285 and policies adopted by the study group created under the bill.

02:48 PM

Discussion continued regarding the scope of responsibility and representation for the study group created by the bill. The committee discussed the potential for amending the bill to address concerns with this the study group.

02:57 PM -- Ms. Denise Maes, representing the American Civil Liberties Union, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Maes discussed the benefits of equipping police officers with body-worn cameras, and addressed earlier testimony about a forthcoming amendment.

03:00 PM -- Ms. Lisa Calderon, representing, the Colorado Latino Forum, testified in support HB 15-1285. Ms. Calderon discussed the profiling of certain populations by the police, and stated her position on certain proposed amendments to the bill. Ms. Calderon discussed the make-up and oversight responsibilities of the study group created by the bill.

03:06 PM -- Ms. Jeanne Smith, representing the Department of Public Safety, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Smith discussed the administration of the study group created by the bill by her department. Ms. Smith responded to questions regarding the nature and import of the recommendations to be made by the study group, and concerns expressed earlier about the nexus between the study group's program recommendations and the potential for receiving a body camera grant under the bill. Ms. Smith responded to further questions about the potential for federal moneys to become available for body-worn cameras.

03:16 PM

Ms. Smith responded to questions regarding the administration of the study group created by the bill.

03:18 PM -- Mr. Mike Violette, representing the Colorado Fraternal Order of Police, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Violette reiterated earlier testimony from law enforcement, and provided his position on a forthcoming amendment.

03:21 PM -- Mr. Tom Raynes, representing the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Raynes discussed the benefits of body-worn cameras for police, and the effect of a specific provision in the bill on community trust of law enforcement. Mr. Raynes addressed earlier testimony about available remedies for violating body worn-camera policies created under the bill, and expressed support for amendment L.003. Mr. Raynes responded to questions regarding his position on Section 24-33.5-517 (3)(c)(IV), C.R.S., in the bill.

Representative Kagan asked for a no vote on amendment L.003, and explained his reasons for doing so. Representative Kagan proposed a conceptual substitute amendment to L.003. Representative Kagan responded to questions regarding his conceptual amendment. Representative Dore discussed the merits of amendment L.003 as compared to the conceptual amendment. Discussion ensued regarding the competing amendments.


BILL:	HB15-1285
TIME:	03:29:26 PM
MOVED:	Kagan
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.003 (Attachment A). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Van Winkle
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION:


BILL:	HB15-1285
TIME:	03:35:40 PM
MOVED:	Kagan
MOTION:	Adopt a conceptual amendment to the bill, page 7, line 5, strike "Recommend" and substitute "Consider". The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Pettersen
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection

03:42 PM


BILL:	HB15-1285
TIME:	03:42:49 PM
MOVED:	Kagan
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.002 (Attachment B), as amended. The motion passed without objection. 15HouseJud0331AttachB.pdf
SECONDED:	Pettersen
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:	HB15-1285
TIME:	04:10:35 PM
MOVED:	Kagan
MOTION:	Adopt a conceptual amendment to amendment L.002, page 1, line 5, strike ""fourteen"." and substitute ""fifteen"."; after line 5, insert "Page 5, line 20, strike "but not" and substitute "and".". The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Salazar
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:	HB15-1285
TIME:	03:46:34 PM
MOVED:	Kagan
MOTION:	Adopt a conceptual amendment to L.002, page 1, line 5, strike ""fourteen"." and substitute ""fifteen".". The motion was withdrawn.
SECONDED:	Court
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION:


BILL:	HB15-1285
TIME:	04:05:40 PM
MOVED:	Foote
MOTION:	Adopt a conceptual amendment to L.002, page 1, line 5, strike ""fourteen"." and substitute ""fifteen".". The motion was withdrawn.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION:


BILL:	HB15-1285
TIME:	04:14:23 PM
MOVED:	Kagan
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.004 (Attachment C). The motion passed without objection. 15HouseJud0331AttachC.pdf
SECONDED:	Court
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:	HB15-1285
TIME:	04:15:59 PM
MOVED:	Dore
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.005 (Attachment D). The motion failed on a vote of 6-7. 15HouseJud0331AttachD.pdf
SECONDED:	Lawrence
		VOTE
	Buckner	No
	Carver	Yes
	Court	No
	Dore	Yes
	Foote	No
	Lawrence	Yes
	Lundeen	Yes
	Pettersen	No
	Salazar	No
	Van Winkle	Yes
	Willett	Yes
	Lee	No
	Kagan	No

YES: 6 NO: 7 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL

04:34 PM

Representatives Kagan and Williams provided closing remarks in support of HB 15-1285.


BILL:	HB15-1285
TIME:	04:38:24 PM
MOVED:	Kagan
MOTION:	Refer House Bill 15-1285, as amended, to the Committee on Appropriations. The motion passed on a vote of 13-0.
SECONDED:	Salazar
		VOTE
	Buckner	Yes
	Carver	Yes
	Court	Yes
	Dore	Yes
	Foote	Yes
	Lawrence	Yes
	Lundeen	Yes
	Pettersen	Yes
	Salazar	Yes
	Van Winkle	Yes
	Willett	Yes
	Lee	Yes
	Kagan	Yes

Final YES: 13 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

04:39 PM

The committee recessed.

04:55 PM -- HB15-1290

The committee returned to order. Representatives Salazar and Esgar, co-prime sponsors, presented House Bill 15-1290. This bill creates a private civil right of action against the employer of a peace officer who interferes with, destroys, or retaliates against a person who is lawfully recording an incident involving the peace officer, or when the peace officer intentionally seizes or otherwise obtains the recording without permission. In the action, the person who lawfully recorded the incident is entitled to actual damages, a civil penalty of $15,000, and attorneys fees and costs.

The bill clarifies that an action brought under the bill does not preclude the district attorney from charging a peace officer with tampering with physical evidence or any other crime. The bill defines retaliation as a threat, act of harassment, or act of harm or injury upon any person or property, when that action is directed to or committed against the person making the recording.

Representative Salazar provided information about case law on the issue of the recording of police-related incidents. He characterized the issue as one of training for police officers.

05:01 PM

The sponsors discussed issues related to governmental immunity, sovereign immunity, constitutional principles, and vicarious liability with the members of the committee. Representative Salazar spoke extensively about the training of police officers. Representative Salazar responded to questions regarding damages to be awarded to a plaintiff under the bill, and case law pertaining to remedies where a peace officer interferes with the recording of an incident. Representative Salazar responded to questions regarding lines of defense available to defendants in such cases.

05:17 PM

The following persons testified regarding HB 15-1290:

05:18 PM -- Mr. Levi Frasier, representing himself, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Frasier discussed an incident during which he recorded police activity associated with a drug arrest, and the police confronted him about the recording. Mr. Frasier responded to questions regarding the ramifications of the incident in terms of punishment meted out to the police involved in the incident. Mr. Frasier discussed subsequent efforts he undertook to preserve and disseminate the video footage he filmed, and his appearances in the media concerning the incident. Mr. Frasier discussed an initial incident he had with the police.

05:33 PM -- Sheriffs Lou Vallario and Chad Day, representing the County Sheriffs of Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. Sheriff Day explained that the sheriffs are not against the recording of police, and discussed remedies already available to address police interference with such activity. Sheriff Day expressed some concerns about certain terms in the bill. Sheriff Day responded to questions regarding policies observed within his office pertaining to being recorded by members of the public. Sheriff Vallario discussed certain reservations he has about the bill.

05:41 PM -- Mr. Jason Warf, representing the Southern Colorado Cannabis Council, testified in support of the bill.

05:43 PM -- Mr. Mike Violette, representing the Fraternal Order of Police, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Violette explained why he feels the bill is a "solution in search of a problem," and discussed options available to the police for obtaining recordings of police-related incidents. Mr. Violette responded to questions regarding the need for police to secure a warrant to obtain such recordings.

05:52 PM -- Mr. Greg Romberg, representing the Colorado Press Association and the Colorado Broadcasters Association, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Romberg made a suggestion on how to improve the bill. Discussion ensued regarding the difference between the media and the general public.

05:56 PM -- Chief Kevin Paletta, representing the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, testified in opposition to the bill. Chief Paletta discussed situations in which recordings of police incidents may be evidence of a crime, and thus subject to potential sequestration by the police. Chief Paletta cited a newspaper editorial that illustrates his concerns with the bill, and discussed the civil remedies available to plaintiffs under the bill. Chief Paletta responded to questions regarding the circumstances under which he could be convinced to support the bill, and methods for deterring police misconduct in the area of interacting with members of the public recording police-related incidents. Representative Salazar addressed claims made by Chief Paletta and others about the latitude afforded to police in confronting persons recording incidents.

06:10 PM

Discussion ensued regarding what steps the police should take to preserve recordings of a police-related incident or a crime while seeking a warrant to obtain the recordings. Representative Salazar responded to questions regarding a fact pattern related to the recording of an assault against a police officer.

06:20 PM -- Ms. Lisa Calderon, representing the Colorado Latino Forum, testified in support of HB 15-1290. Ms. Calderon discussed the scope of police interference with recording of police-related incidents by the public, and addressed suggestions made by law enforcement officers on how to improve the bill. Ms. Calderon discussed incidents during which she has been threatened with arrest by the police, and supported levying penalties against the police when they abridge the right of members of the public to record incidents. Ms. Calderon discussed the benefits of the bill in the area of community trust. Ms. Calderon responded to questions regarding the enforcement mechanisms in the bill, and the geographic scope of the issue of police interference with public recording of incidents. Discussion ensued regarding statistics associated with police interference with public recordings of police incidents.

06:30 PM -- Mr. Rich Orman and Mr. Tom Raynes, representing the Eighteenth Judicial District and the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Raynes addressed claims made during earlier testimony. He responded to questions regarding how the police might seize a recording device when it contains evidence of a crime. Mr. Raynes discussed the litigious nature of the bill, and the potential effect of the bill on the ability of police officers to perform their duties. Mr. Raynes made suggestions on how to improve the bill. Mr. Raynes responded to questions regarding the consequences of, and remedies for, a police officer illegitimately seizing a recording of a police-related incident. Mr. Orman addressed earlier discussion concerning a court case about exigent circumstances associated with public recording of a police-related incident. Mr. Orman addressed earlier testimony about securing video evidence of a crime's commission.

06:41 PM

Mr. Raynes responded to questions regarding remedies available for intentionally destroying an incident recording.

06:43 PM -- Ms. Denise Maes, representing the American Civil Liberties Union, testified in support of HB 15-1290. Ms. Maes discussed the constitutional right to record police, and a pattern of police seeking to stop such activity. She discussed the need for the bill, and policies in place in local jurisdictions pertaining to public recording of police incidents. Ms. Maes addressed claims made during earlier testimony, and discussed the remedies available to the public in instances of police misconduct. Ms. Maes responded to questions regarding the treatment of the preservation of evidence of a crime by the bill, and the compulsion of witness testimony. Discussion ensued regarding jurisprudence and exigent circumstances.

06:55 PM

Ms. Maes responded to questions regarding remedies available to members of the public for illegal interference of recording activity by the police other than lodging a lawsuit under HB 15-1290. Ms. Maes responded to further questions regarding the ability of the police to seize a recording device to prevent the loss of evidence of a crime, and the preservation of such evidence while a warrant is sought. Discussion ensued on this point, and the potential for amending the bill to demonstrate that the threshold for a successful lawsuit under the bill is strict liability.

07:08 PM -- Ms. Meghan Dollar, representing the Colorado Municipal League, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Dollar supported law enforcement's position on the bill, and discussed the resources available to municipalities for both police officer training and addressing lawsuits launched under the bill. Ms. Dollar responded to questions regarding remedies available to the public when a police officer illegitimately obstructs the recording of a police-related incident without passing HB 15-1290. Discussion ensued on this point. Discussion followed regarding the potential for laying the bill over to work on amendments to address certain concerns.

07:19 PM -- Ms. Irene Rodriguez, representing KGNU, testified regarding the bill. Ms. Rodriguez discussed the need to hear from underrepresented voices, and related an incident during which she was beaten while recording police activity. She discussed acts of police brutality during this incident, and the underreporting of incidents of police brutality. Ms. Rodriguez discussed the lack of protections for the public in terms of police interaction. Ms. Rodriguez responded to questions regarding the incident she discussed.

07:25 PM

The bill was laid over for action only.

07:26 PM

The committee recessed.

07:27 PM

The committee returned to order.

07:28 PM -- HB15-1287

Representative Williams, prime sponsor, presented House Bill 15-1287, concerning measures to improve peace officer training. Representative Williams discussed the need for additional training for police officers, and explained the effect of the bill. She also discussed the need for the legislation.

07:36 PM

The following persons testified regarding HB 15-1287:

07:37 PM -- Sheriff Chad Day, representing the County Sheriffs of Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. Sheriff Day discussed efforts undertaken by the sheriffs to reach a compromise on the bill, and explained that certain elements of the bill are being covered in the current training regimen for police. Sheriff Day discussed citizens academies, and opposed changes made to the Peace Officer Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.) Board by the bill. Sheriff Day responded to questions regarding the specific elements of the bill his organization opposes. Representative Court noted a forthcoming amendment to the bill that may address certain concerns expressed by Sheriff Day. Discussion ensued regarding amendment L.001 (Attachment E).

15HouseJud0331AttachE.pdf

07:49 PM -- Ms. Lisa Calderon, representing the Colorado Latino Forum, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Calderon discussed the need for police training to address bias issues, and to create uniformity in the police training regimen across jurisdictions. Ms. Calderon spoke in support of increasing community participation on the P.O.S.T. Board.

07:54 PM -- Chief John Jackson, representing the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, testified on the bill. Chief Jackson discussed actions he has undertaken to improve police training across Colorado, and discussed the training requirements for police officers in Colorado. Chief Jackson discussed other initiatives he has assisted with to improve officer performance, and explained how his organization has come to a neutral position on HB 15-1287. Chief Jackson discussed the process by which police training programs are created, and spoke in favor of due process for officers. Chief Jackson lent his support for amendment L.001.

08:04 PM

Chief Jackson responded to questions regarding a provision in the bill that requires revocation of a peace officer's P.O.S.T. certification if he or she fails to comply with the bill's training requirements. Chief Jackson responded to questions regarding how best to improve HB 15-1287.

08:10 PM -- Ms. Denise Maes, representing the American Civil Liberties Union, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Maes discussed the impact of police training on police-related violence, and cited statistics about violence committed against police. Ms. Maes supported appropriate training and training review for police officers.

08:14 PM -- Ms. Jennifer Anderson, representing the Department of Law, made herself available to answer questions about the P.O.S.T. Board and its training. Ms. Anderson responded to questions regarding the process by which police officers are decertified before the P.O.S.T. Board, and the infractions that lead to decertification. Ms. Anderson responded to further questions regarding the impact of a police officer being suspended, and the authority of the P.O.S.T. Board to issue suspensions.

08:22 PM

Representative Williams noted the position of the Colorado District Attorneys' Council on the bill, as well as the City and County of Denver.


BILL:	HB15-1287
TIME:	08:23:12 PM
MOVED:	Kagan
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.001 (Attachment E), as amended. The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Court
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection

Representative Williams explained the effect of amendment L.001. Representative Dore explained the effect of amendment L.002 (Attachment F), which amends amendment L.001.

15HouseJud0331AttachF.pdf


BILL:	HB15-1287
TIME:	08:28:50 PM
MOVED:	Dore
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.002 (Attachment F). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Lundeen
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection

08:30 PM

Representative Williams provided closing remarks in support of HB 15-1287. Discussion ensued regarding the potential for further amending the bill.


BILL:	HB15-1287
TIME:	08:31:57 PM
MOVED:	Kagan
MOTION:	Refer House Bill 15-1287, as amended, to the Committee on Appropriations. The motion passed on a vote of 13-0.
SECONDED:	Buckner
		VOTE
	Buckner	Yes
	Carver	Yes
	Court	Yes
	Dore	Yes
	Foote	Yes
	Lawrence	Yes
	Lundeen	Yes
	Pettersen	Yes
	Salazar	Yes
	Van Winkle	Yes
	Willett	Yes
	Lee	Yes
	Kagan	Yes

Final YES: 13 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

08:33 PM -- HB15-1289

Representatives Salazar and Everett, prime sponsors, presented House Bill 15-1289, concerning criminal charges based on a violation of an unlawful order. Representative Salazar explained the genesis of the legislation, and discussed the need for it. Representative Everett provided further information on the bill's creation. Representative Salazar explained the effect of amendment L.003 (Attachment G).

15HouseJud0331AttachG.pdf

08:40 PM

The following persons testified regarding HB 15-1289:

08:41 PM -- Sheriff Chad Day, representing the County Sheriffs of Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. Sheriff Day discussed the reimbursement requirements of the bill, and suggested that the bill is not necessary. Sheriff Day responded to questions regarding the types of fees that would be reimbursed under the bill. Discussion ensued regarding the remedies available to a person who is unlawfully charged, as compared to a person who is found not guilty of a crime. Discussion followed regarding a fact pattern that involved an unlawful order issued by a police officer, and the impact of the incident.

08:53 PM

Discussion ensued regarding the difference between the detainment of an individual under an unlawful order and a false arrest, and jurisprudence in the area of unlawful orders. Discussion returned to the fact pattern recited previously. Representative Salazar recited a fact pattern concerning an unlawful order. Representatives Salazar and Willett discussed the impact of amendment L.003.

09:08 PM

Representative Everett responded to questions regarding the restrictiveness of defining "unlawful order" in the bill.

09:09 PM -- Mr. Mike Violette, representing the Fraternal Order of Police, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Violette explained that amendment L.003 improves the bill, and discussed certain potential constitutional issues with the bill. Mr. Violette discussed sanctions that police face when they commit violations and crimes while performing their duties.

09:12 PM -- Mr. Thor Eells, representing the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Eells suggested that finding a police officer has issued an unlawful order constitutes hindsight, and asked what constitutes a lawful or unlawful order. Mr. Eells noted additional concerns with the bill. Mr. Eells noted that the Department of Public Safety opposes the bill, and suggested that the bill serves no purpose.

09:19 PM -- Chief John Jackson, representing the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, testified in opposition to the bill. Chief Jackson discussed claims made at a stakeholder meeting on the bill in which he participated, and explained that the remedies sought under the bill are already in place. Chief Jackson said the bill does not address a training issue, and questioned the clarifying effect of the bill in terms of jurisprudence. Chief Jackson responded to questions regarding his position on amendment L.003, and the elements that would need to be satisfied for the sanctions of the bill to be triggered.

09:29 PM

Representative Salazar rebutted portions of Chief Jackson's testimony. Discussion ensued regarding the cause of action created by the bill, and lawful orders under the Uniform Military Code of Justice. Discussion followed regarding what constitutes an unlawful order with the application of amendment L.003.

09:41 PM -- Mr. Rich Orman and Mr. Mark Hurlbert, representing the Eighteenth Judicial District and the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Hurlbert discussed the punitive nature of the bill toward law enforcement, and discussed the origins of a federal �1983 action. Mr. Hurlbert discussed the repercussions that police officers face for issuing unlawful orders under current law, and explained why the bill is unnecessary. Mr. Hurlbert discussed the provision of attorneys' fees under the bill, and explained that the bill does nothing in the area of police officer training. Mr. Hurlbert responded to questions regarding the fairness of being reimbursed for illegitimately incurred costs under the bill. Representative Salazar explained how attorneys' fees are assessed.

09:49 PM

Mr. Orman discussed the genesis of HB 15-1289, and explained why he feels the bill is unfixable.

09:54 PM -- Ms. Meghan Dollar, representing the Colorado Municipal League, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Dollar questioned how the bill's provisions would be followed.


BILL:	HB15-1289
TIME:	09:57:52 PM
MOVED:	Willett
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.004 (Attachment H). The motion passed without objection. 15HouseJud0331AttachH.pdf
SECONDED:	Dore
		VOTE
	Buckner
	Carver
	Court
	Dore
	Foote
	Lawrence
	Lundeen
	Pettersen
	Salazar
	Van Winkle
	Willett
	Lee
	Kagan

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection

09:59 PM

Representatives Salazar and Everett provided closing remarks in support of HB 15-1289.


BILL:	HB15-1289
TIME:	10:00:18 PM
MOVED:	Salazar
MOTION:	Refer House Bill 15-1289, as amended, to the Committee of the Whole. The motion passed on a vote of 7-6.
SECONDED:	Pettersen
		VOTE
	Buckner	Yes
	Carver	No
	Court	Yes
	Dore	Yes
	Foote	No
	Lawrence	No
	Lundeen	Yes
	Pettersen	Yes
	Salazar	Yes
	Van Winkle	Yes
	Willett	No
	Lee	No
	Kagan	No

Final YES: 7 NO: 6 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

10:07 PM

The committee adjourned.