Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Competency Dismissals topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Providers say courts can avoid unsafe competency dismissals by coordinating care and leveraging public guardianship

Joint Judiciary Committee (House & Senate)
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Bridges of Colorado and the Office of Public Guardianship told the committee competency‑related mandatory dismissals are avoidable in many cases through early identification, judicial referrals to Bridges, Medicaid enrollment work and direct handoffs to long‑term guardianship and placement — rather than ad hoc releases or costly state beds.

Bridges of Colorado, the state’s court‑linked care‑coordination network, told the Joint Judiciary Committee it can reduce the number of competency‑related mandatory dismissals and the associated public‑safety and human‑service risks if the system is used consistently.

Jennifer Turner, Bridges’ executive director, told legislators that competence‑related dismissals occur when courts find a defendant is "unlikely to be restored" to the ability to aid and assist in their own defense — a narrow legal test that does not assess long‑term care needs. Bridges said many judges, defense attorneys and prosecutors benefit when a neutral liaison builds a care plan, coordinates Medicaid and placement paperwork, and arranges a direct transfer to a residential setting or to the Office of Public Guardianship for continuing oversight.

Why it matters: Recent high‑profile mandatory dismissals prompted public concern about defendants released without supports and about the availability of suitable placements. Bridges reported the organization acted as a court liaison for hundreds of participants and that, in cases where Bridges and the Office of Public Guardianship (OPG) coordinated placement, outcomes were markedly better than ad hoc releases.

Bridges gave three practical recommendations to the committee: 1) courts should identify and refer likely dismissal cases early and automatically to Bridges so care coordination can begin while the case is pending; 2) the legislature and agencies should streamline Medicaid reinstatement and allow service coordinators to enroll people prior to release; and 3) the state should remove administrative barriers that prevent available placements from accepting referrals (for example, denials tied to recent incarceration or prior behavior). Bridges and OPG said those fixes are less costly than creating a new network of high‑cost state beds and avoid civil‑liberties and ADA risks from wholesale institutionalization.

Bridges cited judicial data (recent calendar‑year review) that showed about 168 cases where mandatory‑dismissal rules could apply; in a subset Bridges had not been appointed to, the organization said it would now seek automatic appointment so it can provide services earlier. Director Amelia McKeon of the Office of Public Guardianship described a handoff protocol under which OPG takes long‑term responsibility for decision‑making and court reporting when guardianship is appropriate.

Next steps: Bridges asked the committee to authorize administrative work with the state court administrator and Medicaid to implement automatic court notifications and to remove administrative barriers that block placements — actions they say can begin without new legislation or large new appropriations.