Part of a 2016 Colorado law that offers special sentencing considerations for some of the has been ruled unconstitutional by an Arapahoe County judge.
Chief District Court Judge Carlos Samour Jr. this week entered his ruling in a case filed by Curtis Brooks, who was sentenced in 1997 to life in prison without parole after his conviction for felony murder.
The law, Samour ruled, of 30 to 50 years in prison, while 34 other convicts serving life without parole could get new sentences of life in prison with the possibility of parole.
“Under the circumstances present, the court finds that the challenged provisions grant the 16 defendants a special or exclusive privilege,” his ruling says.
Brooks had applied to have his sentence reduced under the law, which the legislature passed last year.
if they commit or attempt certain felonies, such as burglary or robbery, and someone dies “in the course of or in furtherance of the crime.” In Brooks’ case, the owner of a car was killed by someone else as they tried to steal the vehicle. Brooks was 15.
Although Samour’s ruling is very well-reasoned, it is not binding precedent, said Ann Tomsic, chief deputy attorney for the 18th Judicial District. Other judges probably will read Samour’s ruling and base their sentencing decisions on what he wrote, she said.
Court officials on Friday could not immediately say how many of the 50 of defendants have received new sentences.
Brooks’ attorneys, including Dru Nielsen, said they could not comment on the facts of the case. Nor would they say whether they would appeal Samour’s decision.
“Curtis should be out. He should have never been prosecuted as an adult in the first place, Nielsen said Friday. “He was not the shooter.”
Samour concluded that because the portion of the 2016 law applying only to those convicted of felony murder is unconstitutional, he must sentence Brooks to life in prison with the possibility of parole.
The Colorado legislature said juveniles convicted of felony murder cannot be sentenced to life without parole. Had lawmakers passed a bill that applied equally to all people convicted as an adult for crimes committed as a juvenile, it would have been constitutional, Samour said.
“What the legislature could not do, however, is what it, in fact, did: arbitrarily single out the 16 defendants and bestow preferential treatment upon them,” Samour ruled.
Emphasizing his point, he wrote that the legislature cannot act as a sentencing court or a parole board.
While declining to give Brooks a reduced sentence, Samour wrote that Brooks, who was homeless when he committed his crime at a “tender” age, has a compelling and sympathetic story.
Friends recruited him to steal a car near the Aurora Mall during a blizzard on April 10, 1995. Brooks’ role was to shoot a gun as a diversion and he did not aim at anyone, Samour wrote. But one of his accomplices shot the vehicle owner, Christopher Ramos, 24, in the head.
