At the behest of prosecutors and the state’s judicial branch, the House Judiciary Committee advanced a measure to ease the burden of backlogged jury trials, over the objections of defense attorneys.

The committee’s 9-1 vote on Wednesday gives House Bill 1309 fewer than two weeks to complete its journey through the General Assembly before adjournment. The measure, which would permit lower court judges to give a one-time extension to certain criminal trials beyond the deadline enshrined in state law, stemmed from the near-halt of in-person court proceedings during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a speedy trial, and the Colorado General Assembly gives the government six months to bring a defendant to trial from the date of their not guilty plea. If the government fails to meet its obligation, charges are dismissed. The sponsors of HB 1309 framed the legislation as a temporary fix to an unprecedented worldwide disruption, giving courts flexibility to run through the 14,600 trials that were scheduled as of January.

“With some guardrails that I think we’ve inserted into this bill, it’s an equitable way to move forward to answer the concerns of the judicial branch, while also maintaining the defendant’s right to a timely trial,” said Rep. Dylan Roberts, D-Avon.

However, the lone vote in opposition came from Rep. Adrienne Benavidez, D-Adams County, who made an impassioned plea against compromising in any way the existing rights of defendants.

“Poor people, mentally ill people, people of color are disproportionately impacted by staying in custody because they can’t afford to get out and wait outside for their trial to come up,” Benavidez said. She noted that at a May 18 hearing on the legislation, more than one dozen public defenders from across the state came in person to the committee to advocate for other methods of reducing pending trials.

“I cannot get past that we are violating the rights of these individuals, and we are passing it off to the legislature instead of the courts doing this,” she continued. “To leave it to the legislature to say, ‘it’s OK, we’ll be the ones to infringe on the rights of people languishing in jails,’ it’s a mistake.”

The bill’s other sponsor, Rep. Terri Carver, R-Colorado Springs, bristled at Benavidez’s critique. Given that the legislature itself established the speedy trial deadline, “we are absolutely within the bounds of the Sixth Amendment right of speedy trial under constitutional jurisprudence,” she said.

At the sponsors’ request, the Judiciary Committee amended the bill to allow for a six-month speedy trial extension, known legally as a continuance, for defendants who are out of custody, and a three-month continuance for those in custody. A judge would first need to find that the delay was justified from a lack of courtroom space due to COVID-19-releated restrictions and the associated backlog.

The bill as amended would give the victim of a crime the right to address the court prior to an extension being granted. If a defendant is incarcerated and is unable to pay to be released, the judge would need to reconsider the monetary conditions. For lower-level felonies, a judge would order the defendant’s immediate release.

Finally, the Judicial Department must collect data on continuances and publish the information at the end of January and May 2022.

Defense attorneys have argued in favor of maintaining the speedy trial deadline as a means of encouraging prosecutors to look more closely at cases and evaluate evidence. Doing so would expedite decisions to drop charges, revise plea offers or continue to trial, they contended, making a continuance unnecessary. Public defenders cited instances of prosecutors dismissing cases at the last minute for reasons unrelated to the speedy trial deadline.

HB 1309 now heads to the House’s Committee of the Whole for its second reading.