Colorado Ballot Measures Could Change Bail, Parole Eligibility

Colorado's criminal justice system could look very different after the November election, with two ballot measures seeking major changes.

If approved by voters, Proposition 128 would require offenders convicted of certain violent crimes to serve their full sentence if they've been convicted of a violent crime twice before. For all people convicted of certain violent offenses, the required percentage of sentence served before parole would increase from 75 percent to 85 percent.

Amendment I would allow judges to deny bail to people charged with first-degree murder in cases where "proof is evident or presumption is great."

On paper, the two ballot measures have similar goals: to keep violent offenders off of the streets. But they have spurred drastically different debates and supporters. While the state Democratic and Republican parties both endorse Amendment I, the Democratic Party and progressive groups are standing against Prop 128, as the GOP embraces it.

"Continuing to double down on failed policies doesn't seem like it's going to get us a better result," said Democratic Representative Judy Amabile during a debate on the parole issue in February. "We have one of the highest recidivism rates — we think we do, anyway — in the country, and we have one of the higher incarceration rates. ... We shouldn't be focused on how long they're in prison, we should be focused on helping them to recover...so that they can re-enter society."

Amabile and other Democratic legislators voted down a bill to increase minimum prison time for some violent crimes in February. But conservative advocates petitioned the proposal onto the ballot instead, submitting over 200,000 signatures in support of the effort to qualify.

“It is no surprise that when violent criminals are released from prison before they have served even half of their sentences, these felons go right back to their lives of crime,” says Michael Fields, president of Advance Colorado, which is pushing Prop 128. “We can sharply reduce Colorado’s crime wave and make our communities and families safer by enacting Truth in Sentencing.”

The violent crimes included in the ballot measure are second-degree murder, first-degree assault, first-degree kidnapping, first- and second-degree sexual assault, first-degree arson, first-degree burglary and aggravated robbery. Under current law, these inmates may apply for discretionary parole after serving at least 75 percent of their sentence, or earlier if they’ve earned time off for good behavior.

Organizers behind the measure hope it will help address Colorado's nearly 45 percent recidivism rate — among the highest in the nation, according to a 2024 compilation of state criminal justice, corrections office and attorneys general data. But critics point to the lack of evidence that more prison time makes criminals less likely to re-offend when released.

"If incarcerating people who are convicted of violent crimes for longer periods of time actually worked as a public safety mechanism, Colorado and the United States as a whole would have one of the lowest crime rates in the world," said Kristen Nelson, executive director of the Spero Justice Center, while testifying to lawmakers. "Locking people up for longer and longer periods of time doesn't address any of the root causes of violent crime or recidivism."

Opponents also raise concerns that the ballot measure would no longer let certain offenders receive time off their sentences for good behavior, fearing it would result in more violence and poor behavior within prisons.

Proponents say increasing minimum prison time would send a message of support to victims of violent crime. They emphasize anecdotes of criminals re-offending after being let out of prison early — as in December 2021, when registered sex offender Kenneth Lee sexually assaulted a seven-year-old girl in Aurora while on parole for a nearly identical crime committed years earlier.

"Imagine having to explain to the parents of that seven-year-old in Aurora why, despite [receiving] a 23-year sentence in 2014, the perpetrator was able to victimize their child just seven years later," said Republican Representative Mike Lynch, a sponsor of the failed legislative proposal. "Somewhere in our compassion towards rehabilitation, we've lost sight of the victims of these crimes."

The Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, County Sheriffs of Colorado and individual district attorneys have come out in support of the proposal. Organizations such as the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition and ACLU of Colorado are in opposition.

The debate around Amendment I has been less contentious. The effort to remove the right to bail in first-degree murder cases comes after Colorado abolished the death penalty in 2020, unintentionally doing away with the ability to deny bail to murder suspects.

The state constitution says suspects can only be denied bond in “capital cases,” meaning cases that are punishable by death. Since Colorado no longer punishes crimes with death, no suspects can be denied bail, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled last year. The ballot measure asks voters to create an exception to this new rule.

“We have seen harrowing examples in Colorado of first-degree murder defendants posting bail and committing further violent crimes before their court date,” says Senator Rhonda Fields, a sponsor of the proposal, whose son was killed in 2005 before he could testify as a witness in a murder case. “Making first-degree murder defendants ineligible for bail would give victims and their families peace of mind and help keep our communities safe.”

No organizations formally opposed Amendment I, with groups including the Colorado District Attorneys' Council, Colorado Organization for Victim Assistance and Colorado Criminal Defense Bar lining up in support.

The legislature referred the issue to the ballot nearly unanimously in March, as only five out of 100 legislators voted against it. A handful of opponents took issue with language in the measure that would require a judgment on whether "proof is evident or presumption is great" before a murder suspect could be denied bail.

"I worry that we continue to move closer and closer and closer to guilty until proven innocent," said Representative Lorena Garcia, one of the five lawmakers who voted against the initiative. "I feel that when we decide to hold people pre-judgment based on certain levels of evidence, that we are in fact declaring guilt. ... I can't in good conscience restrict somebody's constitutional right that they are entitled to."

Amendment I needs 55 percent of the vote in order to pass since it seeks to change the state constitution. Proposition 128 only needs 50 percent.

Election Day is November 5; keep an eye on our Election topic page for all of our latest coverage.