By Robert Fallbeck

Senate Bill 26-115, being considered by lawmakers in the current legislative session, seeks to allow re-sentencing (aka a “second look”) of inmates who have served 20 calendar years in the Colorado Department of Correction (DOC) for two populations — those who committed the crime when they were under 21 years old (but tried and sentenced as adults) and individuals 60 years old and older.

For context, to receive a sentence that carries a sentence of 20 calendar years likely means the inmate was convicted by either a jury trial or pled guilty to a crime like murder, first-degree assault, sexual assault, human trafficking or a crime of violence, or the individual is a habitual felony offender with at least three previous, separate felony convictions. These are the most dangerous and devastating crimes in our society. To be clear, to serve 20 calendar years in Colorado’s DOC means the offender’s crime was extremely serious. When accounting for DOC’s good-time and earned-time policies, the offender’s original sentence is likely significantly longer than 20 years.

During sentencing a Judge considers victim-survivor impact statements and the victim’s wishes for sentencing, mitigating evidence and history, offender risk, the offense, and sentencing guidelines when determining a sentence. A sentence to prison for an offender can be the key for victims to be able to move forward and find safety, supportive services, and the ability to breathe fully after the worst thing imaginable happened to them. Senate Bill 115 puts all of this into question. Offenders convicted of the most serious crimes could now request a new sentence. More disturbingly, as decades go by, those who would be considering the offender’s request for resentencing may not have even been involved in the original case and may not fully understand the factors considered for the offender’s original sentence.

The sponsors and proponents of the bill speak of hope the inmate can have in being released from DOC and that hope translates to engagement in programming, education, and restorative practices with the victim or victim’s family. Yet we already have a number of existing programs including clemency, pardon, JAYCAP (Juveniles and Young Adults Convicted as Adults Program), and special needs parole that allow for cases to be reviewed and consideration to be given to reducing sentences. This policy being considered duplicates these programs with little support or consideration of the victim-survivors and surviving families.

Victims deserve hope too. They should hope they will be respected and honored by our criminal justice system. They should hope to recover, heal, and feel safe after victimization. They should hope they can trust that a sentence imposed on their offender will actually be the sentence served — a sentence for a crime in which a jury convicted the offender of and a judge, considering all relevant factors, handed down. Too often we already see offenders serving far shorter sentences than what was imposed. Senate Bill 115 definitely gives hope to offenders while dashing the hopes of victim-survivors and surviving families.

As our legislators look at the state budget and policies aimed at reducing our budget shortfall — I beg them not to solve budget issues on the backs of victim-survivors and surviving families. For many victims and their families the harm and trauma they carry is lifelong. Senate Bill 26-115 and its “second look” opportunity for offenders creates new and lasting harm to victims, and our lawmakers should reject this proposal.

Robert Fallbeck is executive director of the Colorado Organization for Victim Assistance (COVA).