Former Colorado County Clerk Tina Peters fights for release from prison as she appeals her nine-year sentence for election-related convictions, claiming her actions were protected by federal law and First Amendment rights.
At a Glance
- Peters received a nine-year sentence for allowing unauthorized access to election systems while investigating alleged 2020 election fraud
- Her legal team has filed a habeas corpus petition seeking release on bond during her appeal process
- Peters claims her constitutional rights were violated and that she was acting under federal law to preserve election records
- A federal judge has questioned whether her petition is valid, giving her 30 days to prove she exhausted all state-level remedies
- Peters is currently serving six months in county jail before transferring to state prison for the remainder of her sentence
Former Election Official Challenges Lengthy Prison Sentence
Ex-Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters is battling for release while appealing her conviction on charges including official misconduct and attempting to influence a public servant. Peters was sentenced to nine years in prison after allowing unauthorized access to secure election areas in what she described as an effort to investigate potential fraud in the 2020 election. Her legal team has filed a request for a writ of habeas corpus in federal court, seeking her release on a $25,000 bond while her appeal moves forward.
Peters is currently serving the first six months of her sentence in Larimer County Jail before being transferred to the Colorado Department of Corrections for the remaining eight and a half years. Her attorneys argue that she has significant health concerns, including a recurrence of lung cancer and fibromyalgia, which warrant consideration for her release during the appeals process. They have requested conditions that would allow Peters to remain at home, attend medical appointments, and travel for business purposes.
Tina's Opening Brief in her Appeal was filed on Monday in the Colorado Court of Appeals.
She has two cases, the Habeas Corpus case in Federal Court is to get her out of prison while this Appeal is pending.
Please pray that Tina is released soon, she has already endured 7 months… pic.twitter.com/djpu3jQjxP
— Tina Peters🇺🇸 Whistleblower of fallen Navy SEAL (@realtinapeters) May 7, 2025
Constitutional Claims and Legal Challenges
Peters’ appeal centers on several constitutional arguments. Her legal team contends that her First Amendment rights were violated when she was prosecuted for expressing concerns about election integrity. They further argue that she was not allowed to fully present her defense in court, violating her due process rights. Perhaps most significantly, Peters claims she was acting under federal law that requires preservation of election records, which she believes should shield her from state prosecution.
“Clerk Peters was the one they charged and put in prison, but we have many clerks across the country who are afraid now to come forward and share their concerns for fear of being ‘Tina Petered.’, said Mike Lindell.
Peters was denied bail by Judge Matthew Barrett, who deemed her a danger to the community for allegedly undermining democratic processes. At her sentencing, Barrett accused Peters of having “preached lies” about election security. In contrast, Peters has received significant support from prominent figures like former President Donald Trump and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, who view her case as politically motivated.
#FreeTinaPeters https://t.co/9Nwe3PKbxs
— Boone Cutler 🦬🇺🇸 🦅 (@boonecutler) May 8, 2025
Federal Judge Questions Petition’s Validity
Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak has expressed doubts about Peters’ habeas corpus petition, giving her 30 days to justify why it should not be dismissed. The judge noted that Peters appears not to have exhausted all state-level remedies for some of her claims, making her filing a “mixed petition” that could be subject to dismissal. On June 4, 2025, Peters’ legal team filed a response arguing that she has followed all necessary legal steps in Colorado’s judicial system.
“Even if state remedies have been properly exhausted as to one or more of the claims presented, a federal habeas corpus application is subject to dismissal as a ‘mixed petition’ unless state-court remedies have been exhausted for all of the claims raised”, said Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak.
The court has also denied a motion to dismiss a Justice Department statement suggesting political motivation in Peters’ prosecution. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser had argued that the Justice Department’s interest was inappropriate due to Peters’ political alignment with Donald Trump. Both Weiser and Secretary of State Jena Griswald have publicly supported Peters’ sentencing, citing a breach of trust and threats to election security.
Potential Precedent and Broader Implications
The federal judge’s ultimate decision could establish an important precedent for others seeking release during pending appeals, particularly in cases related to election integrity. Peters’ prosecution came after she allegedly allowed unauthorized individuals to access secure election areas and made copies of hard drives. This led to the decertification of Mesa County’s election equipment and Peters being barred from conducting elections in her official capacity.
Peters maintains that her actions were justified by legitimate concerns about election security and that she was fulfilling her duty to preserve election records as required by federal law. Her case highlights the tension between state election administration laws and claims of federal protection for whistleblowers concerned about election integrity. As her appeal moves forward, it will likely continue to draw attention from both sides of the political spectrum.
