People v. Fallis, 2015 Colo. App. LEXIS 841

A Weld County grand jury indicted Thomas Fallis for second-degree murder of his wife.
Fallis was released on bond pending trial, with a condition that he remain in Colorado during the proceedings.
Fallis challenged the Colorado bond condition as an abuse of discretion and as an unconstitutional interference with his right to parent his Indiana-based children.
The trial court denied reconsideration of the bond condition; Fallis appealed, and the court initially dismissed for lack of jurisdiction before the Colorado Supreme Court clarified jurisdiction under People v. Jones.
Fallis filed this appeal under sections 16-4-204 and 13-4-102, C.R.S. 2014, challenging the bond condition on two grounds: presumption of innocence and parental rights.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does the bond condition transgress the presumption of innocence?	Fallis argues bond implies guilt by limiting conditions.	Fallis contends the court should not treat him as guilty merely by the condition.	No; court properly considered statutory criteria and did not treat him as guilty.
Does the bond condition violate Fallis's right to parent his Indiana children?	Fallis asserts the condition prevents exercising parental rights.	The order itself does not restrict parenting; any limits stem from outside circumstances.	No; the condition does not infringe the parental rights; it concerns flight risk and appearance, and is narrowly tailored.

Balltrip v. People, 157 Colo. 108, 401 P.2d 259 (Colo. 1965) (abuse of discretion standard for bond conditions)
Martell v. Cnty. Court, 854 P.2d 1327 (Colo.App.1992) (bond conditions reviewed for reasonableness and discretion)
People v. DeAtley, 333 P.3d 61 (Colo. 2014) (constitutional and statutory guidance on release conditions)
People v. Allee, 740 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1987) (state interest in enforcing criminal laws and appearance)
Moreno v. People, 775 P.2d 1184 (Colo. 1989) (statutory authority to set bond conditions to ensure appearance)