Local
Appeals panel orders new trial for Andrew Ritchie in Longmont killing
Colorado’s Court of Appeals overturned Andrew Ritchie’s murder conviction, finding that a juror who said she could not be fair was allowed to remain on the panel. The unanimous ruling orders a new trial in the Boulder County case.
A Colorado Court of Appeals panel has overturned Andrew James Ritchie’s murder conviction and ordered a new trial, ruling that a juror who said she could not be fair was improperly allowed to serve.
The 3-0 decision, issued Oct. 22, concerns the 2023 trial over the 2021 killing of Jason Schaefer in Longmont. Prosecutors alleged Ritchie was complicit in the killing; Devan Schreiner, who had a child with Schaefer, fired the gun, according to the case record described by the court.
During jury selection, a prospective juror identified in the opinion as Juror P told the court she had post-traumatic stress disorder and was struggling to focus. She said a prior death threat against her and her family, more than 20 years earlier, made the violence discussed in the case retraumatizing. Asked by Ritchie’s defense lawyer whether she believed she could not be a fair juror, she answered yes.
Juror P also said she had previously seen the prosecutor speak at a political event and admired him. Trial Judge Patrick Butler asked whether she could decide the case based on the evidence rather than her feelings about the attorney. She said she could.
The defense sought to remove her, citing her trauma and doubts about her ability to be impartial. Butler refused, reasoning that she had said she could be fair. The following day, defense counsel again raised the issue, saying the juror had stated she could not be fair. Butler maintained that she had indicated she could treat both sides fairly.
The appeals panel disagreed. Writing for the court, Judge Elizabeth L. Harris said Juror P’s statements connected her inability to be fair to her trauma and the violence involved in the case. Although she said she could set aside her opinion of the prosecutor, she did not retract her earlier statement that her trauma prevented her from being fair, Harris wrote.
Ritchie’s lawyer, Lucy H. Deakins, argued that a juror unable to pay attention to and evaluate evidence cannot render an impartial verdict. The state countered that the juror’s concerns were about her mental health and ability to focus, rather than bias against Ritchie.
The panel concluded the juror’s comments showed bias and sent the case back for a new trial. The ruling does not determine the outcome of any retrial.