David J. Gottorff v. Jason Lengerich and Moses Stancil. David J. Gottorff v. Bryan Coleman, Warden of the Buena Vista Correctional Facility, and Moses Stancil, Executive Director of Colorado Department of Corrections.

── David J. Gottorff v. Jason Lengerich and Moses Stancil. David J. Gottorff v. Bryan Coleman, Warden of the Buena Vista Correctional Facility, and Moses Stancil, Executive Director of Colorado Department of Corrections. ── Court: Supreme Court of Colorado Date: June 01, 2026 Category: General 1 2026 CO 37 David J. Gottorff, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Jason Lengerich and Moses Stancil. Defendants-Appellees David J. Gottorff, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Bryan Coleman, Warden of the Buena Vista Correctional Facility, and Moses Stancil, Executive Director of Colorado Department of Corrections. Defendants-Appellees Nos. 24SA315, 25SA256 Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc June 1, 2026 2           Appeal from the District Court Chaffee County District Court Case No. 24CV9 Honorable Patrick W. Murphy, Judge 3           Appeal from the District Court Chaffee County District Court Case No. 25CV7 Honorable Dayna Vise, Judge 4           Plaintiff-Appellant David J. Gottorff, pro se Buena Vista, Colorado           Attorneys for Defendants-Appellees: Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General Christopher B. Synsvoll, Senior Assistant Attorney General Denver, Colorado 5           PER CURIAM          ¶1 David J. Gottorff, an inmate in the Colorado Department of Corrections ("CDOC"), seeks review of two district courts' orders, denying his petitions for a writ of habeas corpus and ordering him to pay the filing fees associated with each petition. Because the orders address the same grounds for habeas relief and contain identical payment orders, we address them together. Gottorff's petitions raised arguments that prior courts have already reviewed and ruled on or that are more appropriately resolved in his pending direct appeal. Therefore, we affirm the habeas courts' denials of Gottorff's petitions for habeas relief. But because we also conclude that the habeas courts erred by concluding that Gottorff wasn't eligible for waivers of the filing fees, we vacate the fee-payment related portions of the habeas courts' orders.          I. Facts and Procedural History          ¶2 In October 2022, Gottorff was acquitted of one count of stalking and one count of criminal mischief in case number 22CR4 in Ouray County District Court for incidents involving his neighbors between April 2021 and April 2022. In July 2023, Gottorff was convicted of three counts of attempting to influence a public servant, one count of menacing, and one count of stalking in case number 22CR8 in Ouray County District Court for incidents involving several public servants 6 between October 2022 and January 2023. The court sentenced him to an eight-year prison term for these convictions.          ¶3 Gottorff appealed his convictions and sentences to the court of appeals.[1] See Appellant's Notice of Appeal, People v. Gottorff, No. 23CA1857 (Colo.App. Oct. 30, 2023). While his appeal was pending, Gottorff filed numerous postconviction motions with the sentencing court, seeking to have his convictions and sentences vacated and to be released from custody. In these motions, Gottorff alleged that his trial, conviction, and confinement violated various criminal statutes and were barred by collateral estoppel, see § 18-1-302(1)(b), C.R.S. (2025), and by double jeopardy, see § 18-1-301(1)(a), C.R.S. (2025). He also alleged that the sentencing court improperly admitted certain CRE 404(b) evidence. The court denied these motions as they arose, concluding that they either (1) were improper because Gottorff was then represented by counsel and therefore couldn't file pro se motions, (2) failed to state claims upon which relief could be granted, or (3) raised issues related to those raised in his pending appeal.          ¶4 Gottorff then filed a civil action, case number 24CV9, in Chaffee County District Court (the "habeas court") against Jason Lengerich (who was the Warden of the Buena Vista Correctional Facility at the time) and Moses Stancil (who is the 7 Executive Director of CDOC), alleging illegal confinement and seeking relief under a writ of habeas corpus. See § 13-45-101, C.R.S. (2025). He again asserted that his prosecution in c