Committee advances bill that raises penalties for repeat strangulation convictions

House lawmakers on Friday advanced a bill aimed at treating repeated strangulation as a more serious crime, adopting a sponsor amendment and voting 11–0 to send the measure to the Committee of the Whole.

Majority Leader Camille Duran, a sponsor of House Bill 12‑90, told the House Judiciary Committee that strangulation is a distinct, intentional act that frequently predicts lethal escalation in intimate‑partner violence. “It is 1 person placing their hands around another person's throat and saying without words, I decide if you live or die,” Duran said, urging colleagues to treat repeat offenses as patterns that demand accountability.

The bill’s sponsors circulated and the committee adopted amendment L3, which removes a section that would have singled out medical personnel and replaces the term “knowingly” with “intentionally” to align the statute’s mens rea with existing law. Sponsors said the change reflected months of stakeholder negotiation and an agreed approach to address evidence and equity concerns.

Prosecutors and advocates told the committee repeated strangulation commonly signals heightened lethality. Nate Marsh, a senior deputy district attorney who works in a family‑violence unit, said about half of domestic‑violence homicides involve a prior strangulation incident and that about 50% of strangulation episodes leave no visible marks. “This bill will send a message to victims that their voices will be heard,” Marsh said.

Regina Downing, training program director at Violence Free Colorado and a survivor, and Elizabeth Newman of the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault described the medical risks and the ways injuries can be invisible or harder to detect on darker skin, leading to under‑documentation and missed opportunities for intervention.

Committee members questioned whether the statutory change belongs in definitions or in sentencing law and raised concerns about how lack of visible injury affects charging and proof. Prosecutors said sentencing enhancers exist in some domestic‑violence contexts but argued the statute now treats strangulation inconsistently with other assaults; sponsors and prosecutors said the bill is intended to better reflect strangulation’s lethality and to create a stronger legal response when the act recurs.

After closing remarks from sponsors and victims who testified, Vice Chair Carter moved the bill to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation; the motion was seconded and the committee recorded a unanimous 11–0 vote to advance HB 12‑90.

Next steps: HB 12‑90 will be considered by the Committee of the Whole, where sponsors may seek further floor action and technical changes following stakeholder conversations.