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

One of Colorado’s newest federal magistrate judges held his ceremonial swearing-in last week, plus the nation’s highest court has taken up another appeal from the state.

An ‘amphibian’

•  In October, U.S. Magistrate Judge Timothy P. O’Hara took the bench to succeed S. Kato Crews, who the Biden administration appointed to be a district judge in early 2024. Last week, O’Hara held his investiture, which is the formal name for a swearing-in ceremony, where multiple speakers painted a detailed portrait of him.

•  Cook County Circuit Court Judge Thomas More Donnelly called O’Hara an “amphibian,” meaning someone who had litigated all kinds of cases at multiple levels of the judiciary. The top federal public defender for Colorado, Virginia L. Grady, also called O’Hara “100% Ted Lasso,” referring to the fictional soccer coach who is optimistic and folksy.

•  O’Hara, a longtime public defender, comes to the judiciary having tried more than 130 cases to verdict — a level of trial experience that’s uncommon at least in the federal courts.

•  “I’ve had some wonderful moments. I had a plaintiff who felt more comfortable in a settlement conference with me speaking Spanish,” he said. “I’ve had lawyers who came into a contested hearing ready to fight and left shaking hands.”

SCOTUS takes up Colorado case

•  This morning, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it will hear Chiles v. Salazar, a federal lawsuit out of Colorado that challenges the state’s 2019 law restricting “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ minors. Colorado Politics previously covered the denial of a preliminary injunction in the trial court, and at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit.

•  Notably, Chiles marks the first time the Supreme Court is reviewing the work of two recent Biden administration appointees from Colorado: U.S. District Court Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney, who authored the initial order, and Judge Veronica S. Rossman, who wrote the majority opinion in the 2-1 decision from the 10th Circuit last fall.

Heard on appeal

•  After the Colorado Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that judges couldn’t sentence someone to prison plus probation in the same case, a question arose when it was time to fix those sentences. If defendants sentenced to prison plus probation had already served the prison portion, was it OK to resentence them to just probation — meaning they would still have served prison plus probation? That’s fine, the Supreme Court said.

•  A trial judge had no basis to tell the defense to give the prosecution a preview of their expert witness’s testimony during a postconviction challenge, the Supreme Court decided.

•  The Supreme Court might intervene in an ongoing Denver criminal prosecution in which the judge has placed allegedly unreasonable conditions on the defendant’s request to have his case transferred to juvenile court. The justices may also stop a man from continuing to deluge the courts with unsuccessful filings in a long-closed dispute.

•  The state’s Court of Appeals found that prosecutors in two cases didn’t unconstitutionally remove two women of color from juries because of their race.

•  Although a judge who resentences a defendant and pushes back their parole eligibility date has imposed a harsher punishment, the Court of Appeals said that, alone, doesn’t mean the judge acted “vindictively.”

In federal news

•  The 10th Circuit ruled that Golden police officers didn’t violate a man’s clear constitutional rights by arresting him and searching his phone in the context of a long-running neighborhood dispute.

•  A federal judge originally signaled he wasn’t going to hold a hearing on Denver Public Schools’ request to enjoin a new Trump administration policy about immigration enforcement. But then he changed his mind and denied the request on Friday after hearing arguments.

•  A federal judge declined to award attorney fees to the defendants who prevailed in a voter intimidation lawsuit, despite acknowledging the plaintiffs had presented a “very weak” case.

•  Because it was unclear whether a paramedic could unconstitutionally “seize” someone, a federal judge decided a Colorado Springs paramedic couldn’t be held liable for using excessive force on a mentally ill man, nor could a police officer be held liable for failing to intervene.

•  One of the leaders of a 2020 police accountability protest in Aurora can proceed with her claims against the detective who pursued her arrest and against the city for its role in her unsuccessful prosecution, a judge decided.

•  After the 10th Circuit reversed her decision, a federal judge took another look at a constitutional rights lawsuit out of Douglas County and agreed the claims could proceed against one of the defendants.

•  A federal judge concluded a former University of Colorado medical student hadn’t proven she was subjected to unlawful retaliation.

•  An Avon police officer who informed jail deputies about a mentally ill man’s suicidality can’t be held liable for the man’s death in custody, a judge ruled.

Vacancies and appointments

•  There are three finalists to succeed now-District Court Judge J. Jay Williford on the Arapahoe County Court: Jessica A. Brazil, Robert E. Caldwell Jr. and Magistrate Garen D. Gervey.

Miscellaneous proceedings

•  A Colorado House of Representatives committee has advanced a bill to add 15 new trial judgeships over two years.

•  The U.S. Department of Justice under the Trump administration is looking into the state court convictions of Tina Peters, the former Mesa County clerk who contributed to a security breach of her office’s voting equipment.

On break

•  Court Crawl will take the next week off and will return later in March.