In August 2015, Colorado implemented a significant legal change, elevating a fourth DUI conviction to a felony offense. The primary aim of this new legislation was to impose stricter penalties on repeat DUI offenders and bring Colorado’s drunk driving laws in line with other states that had already established felony DUI laws. With over a year having passed since this law came into effect, it is imperative to assess whether it has effectively led to an increase in DUI offenders serving prison sentences.

To answer this pressing question, The Denver Post undertook a thorough examination of 316 felony DUI cases from the past year. Surprisingly, the findings unveiled a striking statistic: nearly two-thirds of felony DUI offenders managed to avoid incarceration altogether. The range of punitive measures handed down to these offenders was wide-ranging, encompassing conventional jail sentences, participation in work-release programs, probationary periods, and, intriguingly, instances of house arrest.

The Absence of Mandatory Jail Time for Felony DUI Offenders:

At the inception of the felony DUI law, there was contemplation of implementing mandatory prison sentences. However, in the spirit of compromise, proponents of the bill ultimately relinquished the concept of mandatory minimum sentences. This concession was made in response to concerns that the law might impose a substantial financial burden in its implementation and be unduly severe in its punishment.

As staunch advocates for the principles of justice, we take issue with the notion of mandatory minimum sentencing. The core purpose of involving a judge and jury in the adjudication of a criminal case is to thoroughly examine the unique circumstances of each case, ascertain guilt, and subsequently determine an appropriate sentence. Mandatory minimum sentencing sidesteps this essential process, disregarding the importance of considering individual case specifics and mitigating factors. It essentially removes the discretion of judges and juries, imposing predetermined sentences irrespective of the complexities inherent in each case.

The Role of Individual Circumstances in Sentencing:

The central question persists: Who should wield the authority to determine criminal sentences? Should it be legislatures that endorse rigid, one-size-fits-all laws, or should it be judges and juries equipped with the comprehensive facts, evidence, and context specific to each case? Recognizing the significance of the individual circumstances surrounding an offense is paramount. While mandatory minimum sentencing might appear to be a straightforward approach, it fails to account for the intricacies and nuances inherent in different cases.

As we approach the forthcoming legislative session, it is highly likely that proponents of mandatory minimum sentencing will strive for further amendments to the law. This ongoing debate over sentencing and the principles of individualized justice is poised to re-emerge prominently.

At Thomas & Ahnell, LLC, our dedicated Denver DUI attorneys are unwavering in our commitment to assisting clients grappling with felony DUI charges throughout Colorado. We firmly believe in the importance of comprehensively considering the unique circumstances of each case and tirelessly advocating for fair and equitable sentencing, based on the facts and evidence presented in the courtroom.