Concerning military protection orders, and, in connection therewith, a peace officer's duty to determine whether a military protection order exists when responding to an incident of domestic violence and a requirement for the court to consid...
Summary
SB26-085 creates a new Colorado statutory section addressing military protection orders and how they should be handled in domestic violence responses and civil protection order proceedings. The bill defines key terms such as armed forces, National Guard, commanding officer, protected person, and military protection order, and describes the types of conduct that a military protection order may prohibit, including contact, harassment, stalking, threats, entry onto premises, and harm to animals or other threats of physical or emotional harm.
When a peace officer responds to a domestic violence incident, the bill requires the officer to determine whether either party is a current member of the armed forces. If so, the officer must search the National Crime Information Center database to see whether a military protection order exists, and if one does, notify the military law enforcement agency that entered the order. The bill also amends Colorado’s temporary civil protection order statute to require courts to consider the existence of a military protection order as relevant evidence when deciding whether there is a risk or threat of harm warranting a temporary civil protection order.
Impact
The bill adds a new reporting and verification duty for peace officers under Colorado law and expands the evidence a court must consider in temporary civil protection order cases. It affects domestic violence response procedures, NCIC database use, coordination with military law enforcement, and judicial decision-making under the civil protection order framework in Title 13 of the Colorado Revised Statutes.
Sentiment
The available context suggests the bill was noncontroversial and received enough support to pass through the legislature and be signed by the Governor. No committee transcript or recorded vote data is provided, but the bill’s subject matter and final enactment indicate general support for improving coordination between civilian authorities and military protection systems in domestic violence cases.
Contention
The main policy issue is the added burden and procedure for peace officers, who must identify military status and check the NCIC database during domestic violence responses. Another potential point of discussion is the court mandate to treat military protection orders as relevant evidence in temporary civil protection order decisions, which could raise questions about how much weight such orders should carry relative to other evidence. The bill text and available history do not show organized opposition, but these implementation and evidentiary questions are the most likely areas of contention.