Rocky Mountain Voice

Tag: Judicial Recusal

Ninety-six minutes later—Barrett denies Tina Peters’ renewed motion to disqualify him
Rocky Mountain Voice, State, Top Stories

Ninety-six minutes later—Barrett denies Tina Peters’ renewed motion to disqualify him

By Jen Schumann | Rocky Mountain Voice Defense attorney John Case filed the motion at 3:17 p.m. Monday. Judge Matthew Barrett denied it at 4:53 p.m. Ninety-six minutes later, Tina Peters’ latest effort to remove the judge overseeing her case was over. The motion cited three major court decisions and included a new sworn affidavit from Rev. Robert Babcox, chief chaplain for the Colorado State Patrol in Grand Junction. Barrett’s denial spanned four paragraphs. The filing argued Barrett was not free to dismiss or reframe sworn affidavits supporting disqualification if Colorado law required the court to presume those statements were true. 2026-0511 DENIED_Defendants Motion for Reconsideration of Order Denying Motion to Disqualify Judge Matthew BarrettDownload Judge Ma...
Judge Barrett refuses to step aside in Peters case, defends sentencing math
Rocky Mountain Voice, State, Top Stories

Judge Barrett refuses to step aside in Peters case, defends sentencing math

By Jen Schumann | Rocky Mountain Voice Judge Matthew Barrett denied Tina Peters' motion to disqualify him on Monday afternoon. In a 16-page order, he accepted every factual claim in the defense affidavits as true, then concluded none of them meet the legal standard for recusal. In a footnote on page 15, he answered the math the defense had used to challenge his letter to the governor. Barrett's order, filed at 3:37 p.m., clears the procedural condition he had cited as the reason he could not rule on Peters' renewed motion for bond pending appeal.  The bond question now sits on his desk under the 48-hour window Colorado Appellate Rule 9(b) sets for ruling on bond pending appeal. The defense's reply on that motion, filed late Sunday night, set up the dispute that follows—a fa...
Peters’ defense says Barrett used facts that were never in evidence
Rocky Mountain Voice, State, Top Stories

Peters’ defense says Barrett used facts that were never in evidence

By Jen Schumann | Rocky Mountain Voice The state said Judge Matthew Barrett's sentencing remarks about Tina Peters were harsh words from the bench, not evidence of bias. Peters' legal team answered with a different question: how did the judge know she appeared on podcasts? Where did he get the words "snake oil" and "junk"? The state's response did not touch that argument. The judge being asked to step aside will decide it. Three filings hit the Mesa County docket between late Thursday and Friday morning. District Attorney Dan Rubinstein's office opposed Peters' motion to disqualify Barrett. Her attorneys replied by introducing a theory the state never touched—that Barrett's sentencing comments relied on an "extrajudicial source," meaning information the judge obtained from out...
Before Peters is resentenced, Barrett must decide whether he keeps the case
Rocky Mountain Voice, State, Top Stories

Before Peters is resentenced, Barrett must decide whether he keeps the case

By Jen Schumann | Rocky Mountain Voice A Mesa County judge has ordered the state’s attorneys to respond to a motion seeking his removal from the Tina Peters case, setting up a legal fight that will determine who presides over her resentencing—and who decides whether she remains in prison while that process unfolds. In an April 22 order, District Court Judge Matthew Barrett directed the state to file a response “as soon as practicable,” with a deadline of April 27. The order does not resolve the issue. It moves it forward. Now the court must decide whether Barrett can remain on the case—and nothing else in district court moves until that question is answered. 2026-0422 ACTION TAKEN_VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY JUDGE MATTHEW BARRETT - People Respond by 4-27Download ...

FD863768-0ACF-495E-9D21-2EF784DFFA6B[1]

Join us at RMV's Freedom Festival

Click Here for Tickets!

This will close in 0 seconds