A bill to deny bond for people guilty of felony stalking or habitual  domestic violence was tabled by the Colorado House Judiciary Committee Thursday.

Some legislators had concerns about unintended consequences, so they sent the bill back for a vote later to consider amendments. “That way we can take care of this bill and hopefully get it out of committee and onto the House floor as quickly as possible,” said Rep. Joe Salazar, D-Thornton, who was acting as committee chairman.

Rep. Clarice Navarro, R-Pueblo, the sponsor of House Bill 1150, cited the case of Glen Galloway, who killed his ex-girlfriend, Janice Nam, in October the day before he was to be sentenced on harassment and felony stalking.

“HB 1150 will protect victims like Ms. Nam from further victimization and abuse by ensuring those who are convicted of felony stalking and habitual domestic violence are behind bars between the time they are convicted and their sentencing,” Navarro told the committee.

The bill adds felony stalking and habitual domestic violence to a list of crimes that don’t qualify for bail between conviction and sentencing. The list includes murder, felonies involving a gun, sex assault and other violent crimes.

Last year, there were 239 felony stalking convictions in Colorado, and only 67 went to prison. Two went into diversion programs, 16 got house arrest and 154 were sentenced to probation.

Salazar, a civil rights attorney and an advocate for victims rights, questioned if the bill, however, went too far and could unnecessarily snare young people with a law aimed at dangerous felons.

“I’m just wondering if there might be a situation here where we’re wrapping up everybody in this bill, and then later on down the road we have to change this law around, because we find out it’s having some unintended consequences on young folks,” Salazar said.

He asked Turner about “minor” offenses.

“Minor is up to interpretation,” Turner replied.

If it’s a felony and a judge agree that a victim was in fear of his or her life, “I would not consider that minor at that point, and I don’t think the victim would, either.”

Denver District Attorney Beth McCann, who last year was a Democratic state representative, said felony stalking is never minor.

She acknowledged that most stalkers still get probation and can get out on bail awaiting trial. The time between conviction and sentencing, however, is a volatile period in the mind of a stalker who’s facing jail time and wants revenge, as in the Nam case.

“It’s a very dangerous time,” McCann said.

She gave the committee members a small indication of how it feels to be stalked. As a prosecutor, a victim once told her the alleged stalker might come looking for McCann for revenge.

McCann told the committee she doesn’t scare easily, but that night she made sure all her doors and windows were locked and pulled her curtains.

“I was just sitting around thinking this guy is certainly crazy enough that he might try to track me down,” she said. “This was just one night out of my life. This woman had to deal with that every night.”

Rep. Adrienne Benavidez, D-Commerce City, and others who testified were hesitant to take such decisions out of the hands of judges who preside over the cases.

“Every case is different,” testified Maureen Cain, an attorney with the Colorado Public Defenders Office who also spoke on behalf of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar.

Neither organization supports mandatory sentencing, she said.

Mandatory jail, especially for those who ultimately get probation or house arrest, could upset a family and a treatment plan that make matters worse is some situations, she said.

“If you put a low-risk person in jail, you increase the chance of recidivism,” Cain told the committee.

She said many defendants take a plea agree with the stipulation of probation, but under the bill they would sit in jail weeks after that to go before a judge.

“You destabilize a person, because now they’ve got a good job, they’re in school, now they’re taking care of their kids again, now they’re in residential treatment,” Cain said. “… The whole mandatory nature may, in fact, not achieve what you want to achieve.”

Rep. Cole Wist, R-Centenntial, was unmoved.

“I’m a little more concerned about the safety of the victim than I am about whether we got the treatment right,” he said.