Committee advances ‘Magnus’s Law’ to require officers offer voluntary breath tests after fatal or serious crashes

Rep. Joseph and co‑sponsor Rep. Silver asked the House Judiciary Committee to move SB 26‑132 — called Magnus’s Law — forward after relatives of a slain 17‑year‑old cyclist described how no on‑scene impairment test was offered after a fatal crash.

The bill would require officers to offer a voluntary preliminary breath screening test when a crash results in death or suspected serious bodily injury, under specified conditions (reasonable suspicion, driver at fault, driver not severely injured and no probable cause for an expressed‑consent test). Sponsors emphasized the measure is voluntary, non‑punitive (results not admissible in court and no driver penalty for refusal), and intended to preserve evidence that otherwise can be lost amid chaotic multi‑agency responses.

Several family members told the committee how the absence of immediate testing complicated investigations. ‘‘One question at that spot where my son died could have brought the truth out immediately,’’ Michael White testified about his son Magnus’s 07/29/2023 crash, describing later evidence in the criminal case that the driver had consumed alcohol and drugs. Jill White, Magnolia’s mother, and other family members and advocates described the personal toll and urged lawmakers to require the consistent offer of a PBT at qualifying scenes.

Traffic‑safety groups and victim‑advocacy organizations also supported the bill. Jacqueline Claudia of The White Line said the measure would close an ‘‘accountability gap’’ and cited polling and research showing broad public support for on‑scene testing after serious crashes.

Law enforcement witnesses said they back the bill’s intent but urged changes to specific operational language. Chief Jeff Strassner of Johnstown, speaking for the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, and Detective Nicholas Wolf asked the committee to remove or revise a provision that would require officers to narrate into their body‑worn cameras a reason when a PBT was not administered. They argued such real‑time narration duplicates written reports, can distract officers on chaotic scenes and could create legal exposure if extemporaneous statements differ from detailed later reports.

Sponsors said they had worked with stakeholders and planned continued negotiations as the bill moves forward; they noted an amendment addressing the camera documentation was discussed in the senate. After brief committee discussion, Rep. Silver moved the bill to the Appropriations Committee; the motion passed on a roll call of 11–0.

What happens next: The bill will be considered by Appropriations. Sponsors said they will continue to refine technical language with law‑enforcement stakeholders, particularly on the body‑worn camera documentation point.

Quote highlights:
"This bill is our way of fixing one of them," Rep. Joseph said, referring to investigative gaps.
"By requiring officers to offer a voluntary preliminary breath screening in crashes that include a death or suspected serious bodily injury, this bill provides a pathway for immediate clarity," said Jocelyn Reimer of MADD Colorado.

The committee recorded a formal motion to send SB 26‑132 to appropriations, seconded by Rep. Carter; the committee approved the referral 11–0.