Task force weighs NGRI changes to let some defendants remain on bond and expand community placement options

Task force members reviewed a bill draft that would change Colorado's treatment of defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI), giving courts greater discretion to leave some defendants on bond, adding community placement as an option for those committed to institutions, and clarifying conditional-release standards.

James Karbach, legislative policy director for the Office of the State Public Defender, said the draft removes categorical custody requirements for certain charges and returns custody decisions to judicial discretion. "This proposal in this bill would...expand the type of charges for which that could happen," Karbach said, noting that the number of people on bond for higher‑level felonies is limited.

Why it matters: Under current law some defendants found NGRI for certain serious offenses are automatically committed to state custody. The draft would allow courts to consider keeping defendants who are already on bond in the community — subject to evaluation and court-ordered conditions — rather than automatically revoking bond and moving them into state psychiatric custody.

Panel members said the change aims to avoid destabilizing people who are already engaged in community treatment and to preserve limited state-hospital capacity for those who most need inpatient care. Jack Johnson, task force chair, said clinical staff generally use different standards in practice when deciding conditional versus unconditional release and the statute should reflect that step-down system.

The bill also would allow a chief institutional officer to authorize community placement or temporary removal to provide treatment and would articulate a separate, clearer legal standard for community conditional release so that conditions and oversight better match clinical practice.

Next steps: Drafters characterized the change as adding flexibility, not automatically releasing people on bond. Stakeholders, including prosecutors and public defenders, will continue to refine language about evaluations, bond conditions, and how the courts should weigh public-safety concerns. The task force did not take a vote; drafters will incorporate stakeholder feedback and return with more precise statutory language and fiscal implications.