One year ago, juvenile offenders had to shuffle into court wearing up to 25 pounds of chains and shackles in most Colorado judicial districts.
Today, an increasing number of judges allow kids to appear in court without restraints, but defense attorneys still say the rights of some juveniles are being ignored without a statewide policy.
Under a 2015 directive from the state Supreme Court, all 22 judicial districts have adopted individual policies for determining whether juveniles should be restrained in courtrooms. This time last year, juveniles who had ongoing cases and were in custody were allowed to appear without restraints in only three districts.
Now, 18 judicial districts permit juveniles to appear without restraints unless certain circumstances exist.
Colorado public defenders — who have spent the past five years working to limit the use of wrist and ankle cuffs and chains — have long argued that forcing kids to wear chains and shackles in a packed courtroom can have long-lasting, traumatic effects. They also say the 22 policies are inconsistent and create wide loopholes that allow too many juveniles to remain in shackles.
“The current landscape in Colorado, in terms of juvenile shackling, is a patchwork quilt of 22 different policies that govern the specific districts in the state,” said Ann Roan, state training director for juvenile defense in the state public defender’s office.
Judges and law enforcement, however, say individual polices are needed to maintain efficiency and safety in Colorado’s diverse courtrooms. Removing a district’s ability to independently decide when juveniles are shackled could strain limited resources.
During the past year, 18 judicial districts adopted policies that juveniles, ages 10 to 17, will not be restrained during court hearings. Procedures in the four remaining districts range from evaluating each case individually to giving sheriff’s deputies discretion.
In all 22 districts, judges list exceptions for when juveniles should be restrained.
“The policies account for the physical limitations of some of our courthouses, the limited staffing in some counties and differing values of individual communities,” Chief Justice Nancy Rice wrote in November. “Although the policies are unique to each district, all of them attempt to strike a balance of public safety and the well-being of juveniles.”
In 10 districts, juveniles charged with a serious or violent crime — such as a Class 1 felony — will remain in restraints, according to The Denver Post’s analysis of the policies. In nine districts, juveniles will be restrained if they have a mental health condition and are acting in a bizarre or erratic way.
Eighteen districts will restrain juveniles if they have made threats or have attempted to hurt themselves or others; 13 districts will use restraints if there is information about an escape plan; and 10 districts require juveniles to be in restraints if their co-defendants are in the courtroom.
At least two districts cited courtroom design and staffing availability as reasons to keep juveniles in restraints.
None of the policies dictate how restraints are used outside the courtroom.
Those exceptions and inconsistent practices for allowing juveniles and their attorneys to request that the restraints be removed are violating the rights of some juveniles, Roan said. There are also concerns about the negative mental health effects of wearing restraints in front of strangers and family members, she said.
“I think a statewide policy is the only way to ensure juveniles have equal access to the courts,” Roan said.
In 2013, a bill that included a provision to remove restraints during court appearances failed in the state House.
A bill that would have required all of Colorado’s judicial districts to research and create a policy about juvenile restraints was killed in 2015 to allow the judicial branch to address the issue without a legislative mandate.
But efforts to create a statewide mandate have been renewed this year.
Rep. Susan Lontine, D-Denver, and Sen. Michael Merrifield, D-Colorado Springs, are sponsoring a bill that would require restraints to be removed prior to any court hearing. The bill also would set a statewide list of exceptions for when restraints are necessary.
The bill has been assigned to the House Judiciary Committee and is scheduled to be heard Tuesday.
The Colorado Judicial Branch has no position on the bill, said spokesman Robert McCallum.
McCallum went on to say that “significant progress has been made in the judicial districts by working with the stakeholders to formulate local policies that best serve the needs of the individual judicial districts.”
Jordan Steffen: 303-954-1794, jsteffen@denverpost.com or @jsteffendp
