A Custer County judge is set to revisit one of the region’s most wrenching criminal cases on June 30, when the court hears arguments on whether Hanme Clark should get a new trial in the Nov. 20, 2023 shootings that left three people dead and a fourth seriously injured near Westcliffe. Clark was convicted in February and handed consecutive life sentences, but his attorneys now argue that newly uncovered materials and discovery missteps, including allegedly misattributed files, violated his constitutional rights and tainted the verdict. Prosecutors say the trial was fair and that key out-of-court statements were properly admitted under long-standing legal doctrines.
Defense Says Evidence Was Withheld Or Mishandled
Clark’s defense team filed motions in March and April asking for a new trial, arguing that evidence discovered only after the jury returned guilty verdicts had been withheld or mischaracterized during the prosecution’s case. As reported by the Wet Mountain Tribune, the motions claim the handling of discovery and certain investigative materials violated Clark’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The filings urge the district court to vacate the convictions or, at minimum, to order an evidentiary hearing into the alleged discovery failures.
Prosecution Pushes Back
In written responses, District Attorney Jeff Lindsey denied any constitutional violations and argued that admission of a recording and other statements did not violate the Confrontation Clause, according to the Tribune. Prosecutors pointed to Colorado precedent, including Vasquez v. People as discussed on vLex, to argue that the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing doctrine allowed certain hearsay into evidence. The office told the judge that the discovery issues raised by the defense are not enough on their own to overturn the jury’s verdict and urged the court to deny the new-trial motions.
What The Law Requires
Colorado’s forfeiture-by-wrongdoing statute requires prosecutors to provide advance written notice before using an unavailable witness’s out-of-court statements under that narrow exception to the hearsay rules. The statute, C.R.S. 13-25-139, was added in 2020 and sets the notice standard that the defense says was not met, according to Justia. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Giles v. California, available through Cornell Law School, also hangs over the dispute. Giles instructs courts to consider whether a defendant acted with the intent to prevent a witness from testifying before admitting statements that would otherwise be excluded.
Case Background
The shootings occurred on Nov. 20, 2023 at a rural property on Rocky Ridge Road near Westcliffe. Authorities say Clark shot and killed Rob Geers, Beth Wade Geers and James Daulton and seriously wounded Patty Daulton. A 12-person jury found Clark guilty in February 2026, and a judge later imposed three consecutive life terms plus additional years in prison. Local reporting from KRDO and KKTV notes the shooting was at 173 Rocky Ridge Road and prompted a multi-state manhunt.
What To Watch At The June 30 Hearing
At the June 30 hearing, the judge will decide whether the defense has shown that the newly disclosed materials and any discovery lapses were significant enough to affect the outcome, and whether any constitutional error requires a new trial. If the court finds prejudice or problems with statutory notice, it could order a retrial. If not, the convictions and sentences will stand, and the defense’s remaining options would include Colorado appellate review or post-conviction petitions. Either way, the ruling will shape the next chapter in a case that fractured a small community and drew broad regional attention in November 2023.
