Welcome to Court Crawl, Colorado Politics’ roundup of news from the third branch of government.

The state’s Supreme Court justices appeared to signal they won’t be undertaking significant implicit bias reform in jury selection after all, and the Court of Appeals held a ceremonial swearing-in for its most junior judge.

Racial bias in jury selection

•  Readers will likely know that intentional racial discrimination in jury selection in unconstitutional, as the U.S. Supreme Court decided nearly 40 years ago. Consequently, attorneys who seek to dismiss jurors of color may need to provide a “race-neutral” reason. In recent years, the state’s Court of Appeals has evaluated whether removing jurors because of their negative experiences with police or even their (allegedly) off-putting demeanor were race-neutral reasons.

•  Last week, the state Supreme Court issued a pair of decisions that were significant for two reasons. First, the justices concluded striking a juror for their bias against police is a race-neutral reason, even if their skepticism of law enforcement is informed by their race. Second, three of the court’s seven members suggested the legislature should abolish “peremptory challenges,” the mechanism by which lawyers typically strike jurors without having to provide a reason.

•  Taken together, those developments imply the Supreme Court isn’t about to adopt wholesale a proposed rule change that has been lingering for more than a year whose goal is to make it more difficult for parties — prosecutors in particular — to strike jurors of color. In fact, Justice Monica M. Márquez, who wrote the concurrence placing the burden of implicit bias reform on the legislature, waved aside the other states whose own implicit bias reforms are similar to Colorado’s pending proposal.

•  “Deferring to the legislature likely means that nothing will change. I am not aware of any state that has, by legislation, eliminated peremptory challenges,” said Robert S. Chang, executive director of the Seattle-based Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, who supports the implicit bias rule change.

Other Supreme Court news

•  The justices also clarified when defendants can force their prosecutors to testify at trial, and concluded a Boulder County man hadn’t met that threshold in his case.

•  Drunk driving suspects may revoke their consent to a blood test, the Supreme Court ruled, noting its federal counterpart has been increasingly skeptical that states can legislate consent for warrantless blood testing on behalf of their citizens.

•  The court accepted two appeals that question when governmental immunity applies for dangerous conditions in public buildings and what relief is available to tenants when their lease provisions violate state law.

From AG’s office to appeals court

•  Last year, the governor appointed Grant T. Sullivan to be a judge on the 22-member Court of Appeals. Although Coloradans may not recognize his name, they almost certainly have heard of cases he has worked on at the attorney general’s office: Masterpiece Cakeshop, about a Christian baker refusing to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, and the “faithless electors” challenge in the wake of the 2016 presidential election, for example.

•  “You would take on the most difficult cases. You didn’t just do that, but you did it with enthusiasm,” said Sullivan’s former boss, Attorney General Phil Weiser, during the swearing-in ceremony last week. “It’s so clear that you were always feeling grateful for the chance to work on these cases. That is precious and that is infectious.”

•  Sullivan is the 11th judge appointed by Gov. Jared Polis in just five years. Polis will have an opportunity to install another judge later this year with Judge Anthony J. Navarro not seeking retention.

Heard on appeal

•  The Court of Appeals ruled for the first time that Colorado’s “anti-SLAPP” law, which is designed to quickly dispose of lawsuits stemming from a person’s First Amendment-protected activity, applies in evictions and also in county courts. However, the appellate judges urged lawmakers to rethink the law’s procedural details or scope.

•  Interpreting a 2018 change to state law, the Court of Appeals confirmed that severely disabled sex offenders may seek to discontinue their registrations, even if they are normally required to register for the rest of their lives.

In federal news

•  A federal judge narrowly barred the state from enforcing a specific non-discrimination provision against a pair of Catholic preschools who wish to participate in Colorado’s universal pre-kindergarten program, but rejected the plaintiffs’ remaining challenge to an LGBTQ non-discrimination policy.

•  A judge pressed an attorney for the City and County of Denver about its potential liability for using force against peaceful protesters in the summer of 2020.

•  A judge declined to dismiss a lawsuit against two Douglas County sheriff’s deputies who sent their dog into a home to bite the sleeping resident after an apparent misunderstanding about a burglary.

Vacancies and appointments

•  Applications are due by July 5 to succeed part-time Kiowa County Court Judge Gary W. Davis, who is retiring after 32 years on the bench.

Miscellaneous proceedings

•  The Colorado Bureau of Investigation received warnings for years about misconduct by DNA scientist Yvonne “Missy” Woods, whose actions have called into question 1,000 criminal convictions.

•  A Denver judge handed down a 448-year prison sentence to a defendant for human trafficking, likely the longest sentence ever imposed in Colorado for such offenses.