Colorado’s second-highest court overturned a man’s attempted murder conviction and 32-year prison sentence because a Weld County jury actually convicted him of a non-existent crime.

To be guilty of attempted murder, a defendant’s conduct must amount to a substantial step toward committing murder. However, for reasons that were unclear, Wade Michael Egloff’s jury was asked to find that Egloff engaged in “a substantial step toward the commission (of) attempted murder.”

In other words – that he attempted to commit attempted murder.

Although the Colorado Attorney General’s Office insisted on appeal that the apparent typo in the jury instruction was “beside the point,” a three-judge panel for the Court of Appeals agreed with Egloff that the conviction could not stand based on the faulty wording. It ordered a new trial.

The panel, in its July 13 opinion, identified additional errors with Egloff’s case.

Case: People v. Egloff

Decided: July 13, 2023

Jurisdiction: Weld County

Ruling: 3-0

Judges: Rebecca R. Freyre (author)

Neeti V. Pawar

Karl L. Schock

Background: State Supreme Court warns trial courts against exceeding restitution deadline

Egloff received 64 years in prison – 32 of which stemmed from the attempted murder – after he violently assaulted a woman by shoving his hand down her throat, beating her and reentering the home to suffocate her after she tried to lock him out. Jurors heard that Egloff similarly battered his previous partner. The prosecutor called Egloff a “premier example of distorted masculinity.”

Egloff’s jury also convicted him of first-degree assault, which requires a defendant to cause a serious bodily injury involving a substantial risk of death. A medical expert who testified at trial said Egloff’s damage to the victim’s throat could have led to a serious infection resulting in death.

Since Egloff’s 2019 trial, however, the Colorado Supreme Court issued a decision clarifying that a victim suffers serious bodily if the actual wound poses a substantial risk of death – not simply if the type of injury inflicted is typically life-threatening.

The expert witness testified the type of throat injury Egloff inflicted on his victim had the potential to be deadly, but not that the victim’s specific injury was deadly.

“The medical examination revealed no damage to the vital structures,” wrote Judge Rebecca R. Freyre in the appellate panel’s opinion. “Focusing on the facts of the actual injury as opposed to the risk generally associated with the type of conduct or injury, the holes in the victim’s throat did not involve a substantial risk of death, serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss of function in any body part.”

The Court of Appeals concluded there was insufficient evidence to support a guilty verdict for first-degree assault. It ordered the reinstatement of Egloff’s second-degree assault conviction, which had merged into the more serious assault offense at sentencing.

Finally, the appellate panel overturned the $13,798 in restitution to the victim that Chief Judge Julie Hoskins imposed during Egloff’s sentencing. Colorado law generally requires judges to set a restitution amount within 91 days of sentencing. Hoskins issued her restitution order 153 days after sentencing Egloff.

Again, the Court of Appeals’ decision was a product of another Supreme Court ruling handed down after Egloff’s trial. The Supreme Court clarified that the typical protocols for awarding restitution, which resembled what Hoskins did in Egloff’s case, did not comply with the law.

Trial judges must act within the 91-day deadline unless they find good cause to extend it. Hoskins did not, and consequently the restitution order was invalid.

The case is People v. Egloff.