Colorado 2018 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 18-252 — Competency to Proceed Evaluations And Services

Last action — House Consideration of First Conference Committee Report result was to Adopt Committee Report - Repass

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed House
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2018 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

The bill makes numerous changes to statutes related to the process of determination of competency to proceed in a criminal case. Section 1 of the bill updates the definitions section of article 8.5 of title 16 to include new terminology. Section 2 of the bill makes changes in the regulation of a second competency evaluation (evaluation) requested by the court, including reducing the time frame that the prosecution or defense may request a second evaluation from 14 days to 7 days and clarifying that the department of human services (department) is not responsible for conducting a second evaluation. Section 3 of the bill concerns changes to competency evaluations and reports, including that: The court shall order the evaluation be conducted on an out-of-custody basis, unless otherwise provided. If the evaluation must be conducted on an in-custody basis, the department is required to begin the evaluation no later than 7 days after the department's receipt of a court order directing the evaluation. The department shall complete the evaluation no later than 45 days after receipt of the court order, unless for good cause shown; A defendant must have bond set unless they are otherwise ineligible for bond. The court shall determine the type of bond after consideration of factors. The court shall include as a condition of bond the defendant's cooperation with a competency evaluation; The court may order a defendant into the department's custody for purposes of an evaluation under stated circumstances; If the defendant is in the custody of the department, provisions for returning the defendant to the custody of the county jail or to the community are set forth; The competency evaluation report (report) must include: If the defendant is determined to be incompetent to proceed, whether or not there is a substantial probability that he or she can be restored to competency within the allowable time frame and whether inpatient or outpatient restoration services are recommended; If available, information on previous evaluations or restoration services provided to the defendant; and If the defendant meets the criteria for civil certification or is eligible for services for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. If the report concludes that the defendant is incompetent to proceed, the department may initiate restoration services unless either party objects within 72 hours after receipt of the report; Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the bill outline procedures to follow after a determination of competency or incompetency to proceed, including that: If the defendant is released on bond, a determination of whether restoration services are to be provided on an outpatient or inpatient basis. If the defendant is ordered to outpatient restoration services and he or she is uncooperative or fails to begin services, the individual agency responsible for providing restoration services shall notify the court within 28 days; The department is the entity responsible for the development of restoration curricula and necessary training to create outpatient restoration services in any setting; If the defendant remains in custody, the court shall order the department to provide restoration services at the place where the defendant is in custody and if the department has no available beds for inpatient restoration services if inpatient restoration services are recommended. The department shall begin outpatient restoration services as soon as practicable after a court's order; The court shall commit the defendant to the custody of the department for inpatient restoration services if the defendant has not been restored to competency within 150, unless the timeline is extended for good cause shown. The timeline must exclude time during which the defendant refuses to accept services or treatment; For a defendant who is receiving outpatient and in-custody restoration services, the court shall review the case every 30 days to assess the defendant's progress toward restoration to competency; If outpatient restoration services have been ordered and the department is unable to provide such services, the court may commit the defendant to the department's custody until outpatient services are available; If inpatient restoration services have been ordered, the most clinically appropriate setting must be used; and The bill reduces the time that either party may request a second evaluation from 14 days to 7 days after receipt of a report concerning competency. If a second evaluation is allowed, the second evaluation report must be completed and filed with the court within 42 days, as opposed to the current requirement of 63 days. Section 7 of the bill outlines the options for reviews, civil certification (certification), provision of services for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities (provision of services), and termination of proceedings (termination), including that: Time periods for review and final determinations related to certification, provision of services, and termination are established for different levels of offenses; In no instance may confinement exceed the maximum term of confinement that could be imposed for the most serious offense with which the defendant is charged, less any time credits the defendant is entitled to; At the end of any maximum amount of time, the court shall dismiss the charges and any certification proceedings or provision of services are to be governed by appropriate laws; The court is required to review the defendant's case at least every 3 months with regard to the probability that the defendant will eventually be restored to competency and to whether there is justification for certification or confinement. The court shall review a current evaluation report that includes information on whether there is a substantial probability the defendant will be restored to competency within the allowable time frame, and if the defendant meets the criteria for certification or the provision of services; If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, misdemeanor drug offense, or petty offense, excluding victim's rights offenses; and has been committed to the custody of the department or otherwise confined for an aggregate period of 3 months, and the court determines that he or she remains incompetent to proceed and there is not a substantial probability that he or she will be restored to competency within the next 3 months, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant. If the court determines there is a substantial probability that the defendant will be restored to competency within the next 3 months, restoration services may continue for another 3 months. After 6 months, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant; If the defendant is charged with a class 5 or class 6 felony, excluding victim's rights offenses, a level 3 or level 4 drug felony, or any misdemeanor offense not otherwise included in earlier section, and has been committed to the custody of the department or otherwise confined for an aggregate period of 1 year, and the court determines that he or she remains incompetent to proceed and there is not a substantial probability that he or she will be restored to competency within the next six months, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant. If the court determines there is a substantial probability that the defendant will be restored to competency within the next six months, restoration services may continue for another six months. After 18 months, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant; If the defendant is charged with any other felony offense, except a class 1, class 2, or class 3 felony, a sex offense, a crime of violence, or a level 1 or level 2 drug felony, and has been committed to the custody of the department or otherwise confined for an aggregate period of 3 years, and the court determines that he or she remains incompetent to proceed and there is not a substantial probability that he or she will be restored to competency within the next year, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant. If the court determines there is a substantial probability that the defendant will be restored to competency within the next year, restoration services may continue for another year. After 4 years, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant, unless any party objects. If a party objects to dismissal of charges, the court shall set the matter for a hearing; Prior to the dismissal of any charges, the court shall identify whether the defendant meets the requirements for certification or provision of services. If so, the court may stay the dismissal for 21 days and notify the department and county attorney in the relevant jurisdiction of the pending dismissal; and Certification proceedings may be brought against a defendant at any time. Sections 8, 9, 10, and 11 of the bill provide that officers of the judicial branch, district attorneys, public defenders, and attorneys for the office of alternate defense counsel should receive training concerning determinations of competency to proceed for juveniles and adults, evaluation reports, services to restore competency, and certification proceedings.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.) , Read More

Bill Text

What changed in the latest version

15 added · 21 removed

Plain-language change summary

The latest version of the bill updates the terminology from "developmental disability" to "intellectual and developmental disability," which reflects a more current and inclusive understanding of these conditions. Additionally, the focus has shifted from training judicial officers to training employees and contractors in matters related to competency evaluations and restoration services. These changes are significant because they aim to improve clarity in the bill and ensure that the training is more comprehensive and relevant to a wider range of professionals involved in these important assessments and services.

→
Previous
Latest
Second Regular Session Seventy-first General Assembly STATE OF COLORADO REENGROSSED This Version Includes All Amendments Adopted in the House of Introduction LLS NO.
Second Regular Session Seventy-first General Assembly STATE OF COLORADO ENGROSSED This Version Includes All Amendments Adopted on Second Reading in the House of Introduction LLS NO.
Bill Summary d (Note:
Bill Summary (Note:
This summary applies to this bill as introduced and does d notreflectanyamendmentsthatmaybesubsequentlyadopted.Ifthisbill e 8 E a 0 passes third reading in the house of introduction, a bill summary that A U , applies to the reengrossed version of this bill will be available at N i 3 S a a http://leg.colorado.gov.) R M r Thebillmakesnumerouschangestostatutesrelatedtotheprocess of determination of competency to proceed in a criminal case.
This summary applies to this bill as introduced and does notreflectanyamendmentsthatmaybesubsequentlyadopted.Ifthisbill passes third reading in the house of introduction, a bill summary that applies to the reengrossed version of this bill will be available at http://leg.colorado.gov.) Thebillmakesnumerouschangestostatutesrelatedtotheprocess of determination of competency to proceed in a criminal case.
Sections 1 and 2 of the bill updates the definitions section that i uses outdated terminology of a "developmental disability" to now a reference "intellectual and developmental disability".
Sections 1 and 2 of the bill updates the definitions section that g uses outdated terminology of a "developmental disability" to now d e 8 reference "intellectual and developmental disability".
E R 1 T d 2 N 2 2 Shading denotes HOUSE amendment.
T R 0 A n , Shading denotes HOUSE amendment.
S e a Capital letters or bold & italic numbers indicate new material to be added to existing statune.M Dashes through the words indicate deletions from existing statute.
E d y Capital letters or bold & italic numbers indicate new material to be added to existing statute.
Dashes through the words indicate deletions from existing statute.
View plain text versions (7)

Amendments

1 amendment

Click Show changes on an amendment above to see how it modifies the bill.

Action History

  1. House Consideration of First Conference Committee Report result was to Adopt Committee Report - Repass

  2. House Third Reading Passed - No Amendments

  3. Senate Considered House Amendments - Result was to Not Concur - Request Conference Committee

  4. House Committee on Judiciary Refer Amended to Appropriations

  5. House Committee on Appropriations Refer Unamended to House Committee of the Whole

  6. House Second Reading Special Order - Passed with Amendments - Committee

  7. Senate Third Reading Passed - No Amendments

  8. Introduced In House - Assigned to Judiciary

  9. Senate Second Reading Special Order - Passed with Amendments - Committee, Floor

  10. Senate Committee on Appropriations Refer Amended to Senate Committee of the Whole

  11. Senate Committee on Judiciary Refer Amended to Appropriations

  12. Introduced In Senate - Assigned to Judiciary

Sponsors

  • Pete Lee · Primary
  • Bob Gardner · Primary
  • Kent Lambert · Primary
  • Dave Young · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

4 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 97 not signed on · 7 voted No

Sponsors (4)

  • Pete Lee
  • Bob Gardner
  • Kent Lambert
  • Dave Young

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (97)

97 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 97 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

ADOPT

Passed 61 Yea · 3 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 48301
Democrat 9000
Republican 4000
Total 61301
% of votes cast 94%5%0%2%
How each member voted (65)
Member Party Vote
Becker J. — Yea
Becker K. — Yea
Buckner — Yea
McLachlan — Yea
Neville P. — Yea
Salazar — Yea
Young — Yea
Arndt — Yea
Beckman — Yea
Buck — Yea
Carver — Yea
Covarrubias — Yea
Esgar — Yea
Everett — Yea
Foote — Yea
Garnett — Yea
Ginal — Yea
Gray — Yea
Hamner — Yea
Hansen — Yea
Herod — Yea
Hooton — Yea
Humphrey — Yea
Kraft-Tharp — Yea
Landgraf — Yea
Lawrence — Yea
Lee — Yea
Leonard — Nay
Lontine — Yea
Lundeen — Yea
McKean — Yea
Melton — Yea
Pabon — Yea
Pettersen — Yea
Rankin — Yea
Ransom — Yea
Reyher — Yea
Rosenthal — Yea
Saine — Nay
Sandridge — Nay
Sias — Yea
Singer — Yea
Thurlow — Yea
Willett — Yea
Winkler — Yea
Wist — Yea
Adrienne Benavidez — Yea
Jaquez Lewis — Not Voting
Michaelson Jenet — Yea
Van Winkle — Yea
Williams D. — Yea
deGruy Kennedy — Yea
Alex Valdez Democrat Yea
Dylan Roberts Democrat Yea
James Coleman Democrat Yea
Jamie Jackson Democrat Yea
Jeff Bridges Democrat Yea
Jessie Danielson Democrat Yea
Mike Weissman Democrat Yea
Monica Duran Democrat Yea
Tony Exum Democrat Yea
Larry Liston Republican Yea
Lynda Zamora Wilson Republican Yea
Marc Catlin Republican Yea
Ty Winter Republican Yea

Official roll call →

BILL

Passed 33 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 32002
Democrat 1000
Total 33002
% of votes cast 94%0%0%6%
How each member voted (35)
Member Party Vote
Court — Yea
Gardner — Yea
Kerr — Yea
Neville T. — Yea
Williams A. — Yea
Aguilar — Yea
Baumgardner — Not Voting
Cooke — Yea
Coram — Yea
Crowder — Yea
Donovan — Yea
Fenberg — Yea
Fields — Yea
Grantham — Yea
Guzman — Yea
Hill — Yea
Holbert — Yea
Jahn — Yea
Jones — Yea
Kagan — Yea
Kefalas — Yea
Lambert — Yea
Lundberg — Yea
Marble — Yea
Merrifield — Yea
Moreno — Yea
Priola — Yea
Scott — Yea
Smallwood — Yea
Sonnenberg — Not Voting
Tate — Yea
Todd — Yea
Zenzinger — Yea
Martinez Humenik — Yea
Lorena Garcia Democrat Yea

Official roll call →

NOT CONCUR APPT CC

Passed 35 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 34000
Democrat 1000
Total 35000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (35)
Member Party Vote
Court — Yea
Gardner — Yea
Kerr — Yea
Neville T. — Yea
Williams A. — Yea
President — Yea
Aguilar — Yea
Baumgardner — Yea
Cooke — Yea
Coram — Yea
Crowder — Yea
Donovan — Yea
Fenberg — Yea
Fields — Yea
Guzman — Yea
Hill — Yea
Holbert — Yea
Jahn — Yea
Jones — Yea
Kagan — Yea
Kefalas — Yea
Lambert — Yea
Lundberg — Yea
Marble — Yea
Merrifield — Yea
Moreno — Yea
Priola — Yea
Scott — Yea
Smallwood — Yea
Sonnenberg — Yea
Tate — Yea
Todd — Yea
Zenzinger — Yea
Martinez Humenik — Yea
Lorena Garcia Democrat Yea

Official roll call →

REPASS

Passed 52 Yea · 12 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 411001
Democrat 8100
Republican 3100
Total 521201
% of votes cast 80%18%0%2%
How each member voted (65)
Member Party Vote
Becker J. — Yea
Becker K. — Yea
Buckner — Yea
McLachlan — Yea
Neville P. — Nay
Salazar — Yea
Young — Yea
Arndt — Yea
Beckman — Nay
Buck — Yea
Carver — Yea
Covarrubias — Yea
Esgar — Yea
Everett — Nay
Foote — Yea
Garnett — Yea
Ginal — Yea
Gray — Yea
Hamner — Yea
Hansen — Yea
Herod — Yea
Hooton — Yea
Humphrey — Nay
Kraft-Tharp — Yea
Landgraf — Yea
Lawrence — Yea
Leonard — Nay
Lee — Yea
Lontine — Yea
Lundeen — Yea
McKean — Yea
Melton — Yea
Pabon — Yea
Pettersen — Yea
Rankin — Yea
Ransom — Nay
Reyher — Yea
Rosenthal — Yea
Saine — Nay
Sandridge — Nay
Sias — Yea
Singer — Yea
Thurlow — Yea
Willett — Yea
Winkler — Yea
Wist — Yea
Adrienne Benavidez — Yea
Jaquez Lewis — Not Voting
Michaelson Jenet — Yea
Van Winkle — Nay
Williams D. — Nay
deGruy Kennedy — Yea
Alex Valdez Democrat Yea
Dylan Roberts Democrat Yea
James Coleman Democrat Yea
Jamie Jackson Democrat Yea
Jeff Bridges Democrat Yea
Jessie Danielson Democrat Yea
Mike Weissman Democrat Nay
Monica Duran Democrat Yea
Tony Exum Democrat Yea
Larry Liston Republican Nay
Lynda Zamora Wilson Republican Yea
Marc Catlin Republican Yea
Ty Winter Republican Yea

Official roll call →

BYD SCP

Passed 42 Yea · 23 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 312100
Democrat 9000
Republican 2200
Total 422300
% of votes cast 65%35%0%0%
How each member voted (65)
Member Party Vote
Becker J. — Nay
Becker K. — Yea
Buckner — Yea
McLachlan — Yea
Neville P. — Nay
Salazar — Yea
Young — Yea
Arndt — Yea
Beckman — Nay
Buck — Nay
Carver — Nay
Covarrubias — Nay
Esgar — Yea
Everett — Nay
Foote — Yea
Garnett — Yea
Ginal — Yea
Gray — Yea
Hansen — Yea
Hamner — Yea
Herod — Yea
Hooton — Yea
Humphrey — Nay
Kraft-Tharp — Yea
Landgraf — Yea
Lawrence — Yea
Lee — Yea
Leonard — Nay
Lontine — Yea
Lundeen — Nay
McKean — Nay
Melton — Yea
Pabon — Yea
Pettersen — Yea
Rankin — Yea
Ransom — Nay
Reyher — Nay
Rosenthal — Yea
Saine — Yea
Sandridge — Nay
Sias — Nay
Singer — Yea
Thurlow — Yea
Willett — Nay
Winkler — Nay
Wist — Nay
Adrienne Benavidez — Yea
Jaquez Lewis — Nay
Michaelson Jenet — Yea
Van Winkle — Nay
Williams D. — Nay
deGruy Kennedy — Yea
Alex Valdez Democrat Yea
Dylan Roberts Democrat Yea
James Coleman Democrat Yea
Jamie Jackson Democrat Yea
Jeff Bridges Democrat Yea
Jessie Danielson Democrat Yea
Mike Weissman Democrat Yea
Monica Duran Democrat Yea
Tony Exum Democrat Yea
Larry Liston Republican Yea
Lynda Zamora Wilson Republican Nay
Marc Catlin Republican Nay
Ty Winter Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 18-252 do?
The bill makes numerous changes to statutes related to the process of determination of competency to proceed in a criminal case. Section 1 of the bill updates the definitions section of article 8.5 of title 16 to include new terminology. Section 2 of the bill makes changes in the regulation of a second competency evaluation (evaluation) requested by the court, including reducing the time frame that the prosecution or defense may request a second evaluation from 14 days to 7 days and clarifying that the department of human services (department) is not responsible for conducting a second evaluation. Section 3 of the bill concerns changes to competency evaluations and reports, including that: The court shall order the evaluation be conducted on an out-of-custody basis, unless otherwise provided. If the evaluation must be conducted on an in-custody basis, the department is required to begin the evaluation no later than 7 days after the department's receipt of a court order directing the evaluation. The department shall complete the evaluation no later than 45 days after receipt of the court order, unless for good cause shown; A defendant must have bond set unless they are otherwise ineligible for bond. The court shall determine the type of bond after consideration of factors. The court shall include as a condition of bond the defendant's cooperation with a competency evaluation; The court may order a defendant into the department's custody for purposes of an evaluation under stated circumstances; If the defendant is in the custody of the department, provisions for returning the defendant to the custody of the county jail or to the community are set forth; The competency evaluation report (report) must include: If the defendant is determined to be incompetent to proceed, whether or not there is a substantial probability that he or she can be restored to competency within the allowable time frame and whether inpatient or outpatient restoration services are recommended; If available, information on previous evaluations or restoration services provided to the defendant; and If the defendant meets the criteria for civil certification or is eligible for services for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. If the report concludes that the defendant is incompetent to proceed, the department may initiate restoration services unless either party objects within 72 hours after receipt of the report; Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the bill outline procedures to follow after a determination of competency or incompetency to proceed, including that: If the defendant is released on bond, a determination of whether restoration services are to be provided on an outpatient or inpatient basis. If the defendant is ordered to outpatient restoration services and he or she is uncooperative or fails to begin services, the individual agency responsible for providing restoration services shall notify the court within 28 days; The department is the entity responsible for the development of restoration curricula and necessary training to create outpatient restoration services in any setting; If the defendant remains in custody, the court shall order the department to provide restoration services at the place where the defendant is in custody and if the department has no available beds for inpatient restoration services if inpatient restoration services are recommended. The department shall begin outpatient restoration services as soon as practicable after a court's order; The court shall commit the defendant to the custody of the department for inpatient restoration services if the defendant has not been restored to competency within 150, unless the timeline is extended for good cause shown. The timeline must exclude time during which the defendant refuses to accept services or treatment; For a defendant who is receiving outpatient and in-custody restoration services, the court shall review the case every 30 days to assess the defendant's progress toward restoration to competency; If outpatient restoration services have been ordered and the department is unable to provide such services, the court may commit the defendant to the department's custody until outpatient services are available; If inpatient restoration services have been ordered, the most clinically appropriate setting must be used; and The bill reduces the time that either party may request a second evaluation from 14 days to 7 days after receipt of a report concerning competency. If a second evaluation is allowed, the second evaluation report must be completed and filed with the court within 42 days, as opposed to the current requirement of 63 days. Section 7 of the bill outlines the options for reviews, civil certification (certification), provision of services for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities (provision of services), and termination of proceedings (termination), including that: Time periods for review and final determinations related to certification, provision of services, and termination are established for different levels of offenses; In no instance may confinement exceed the maximum term of confinement that could be imposed for the most serious offense with which the defendant is charged, less any time credits the defendant is entitled to; At the end of any maximum amount of time, the court shall dismiss the charges and any certification proceedings or provision of services are to be governed by appropriate laws; The court is required to review the defendant's case at least every 3 months with regard to the probability that the defendant will eventually be restored to competency and to whether there is justification for certification or confinement. The court shall review a current evaluation report that includes information on whether there is a substantial probability the defendant will be restored to competency within the allowable time frame, and if the defendant meets the criteria for certification or the provision of services; If the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor, misdemeanor drug offense, or petty offense, excluding victim's rights offenses; and has been committed to the custody of the department or otherwise confined for an aggregate period of 3 months, and the court determines that he or she remains incompetent to proceed and there is not a substantial probability that he or she will be restored to competency within the next 3 months, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant. If the court determines there is a substantial probability that the defendant will be restored to competency within the next 3 months, restoration services may continue for another 3 months. After 6 months, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant; If the defendant is charged with a class 5 or class 6 felony, excluding victim's rights offenses, a level 3 or level 4 drug felony, or any misdemeanor offense not otherwise included in earlier section, and has been committed to the custody of the department or otherwise confined for an aggregate period of 1 year, and the court determines that he or she remains incompetent to proceed and there is not a substantial probability that he or she will be restored to competency within the next six months, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant. If the court determines there is a substantial probability that the defendant will be restored to competency within the next six months, restoration services may continue for another six months. After 18 months, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant; If the defendant is charged with any other felony offense, except a class 1, class 2, or class 3 felony, a sex offense, a crime of violence, or a level 1 or level 2 drug felony, and has been committed to the custody of the department or otherwise confined for an aggregate period of 3 years, and the court determines that he or she remains incompetent to proceed and there is not a substantial probability that he or she will be restored to competency within the next year, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant. If the court determines there is a substantial probability that the defendant will be restored to competency within the next year, restoration services may continue for another year. After 4 years, the court shall dismiss the charges against the defendant, unless any party objects. If a party objects to dismissal of charges, the court shall set the matter for a hearing; Prior to the dismissal of any charges, the court shall identify whether the defendant meets the requirements for certification or provision of services. If so, the court may stay the dismissal for 21 days and notify the department and county attorney in the relevant jurisdiction of the pending dismissal; and Certification proceedings may be brought against a defendant at any time. Sections 8, 9, 10, and 11 of the bill provide that officers of the judicial branch, district attorneys, public defenders, and attorneys for the office of alternate defense counsel should receive training concerning determinations of competency to proceed for juveniles and adults, evaluation reports, services to restore competency, and certification proceedings.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.) , Read More
Who sponsors SB 18-252?
SB 18-252 is sponsored by Pete Lee, Bob Gardner, Kent Lambert, and Dave Young.
What is the current status of SB 18-252?
This bill died with 2018 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 18-252?
Track SB 18-252 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 18-252

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of SB 18-252

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →