At the request of President Joe Biden, the U.S. Senate in November confirmed Cole Finegan as the U.S. attorney for Colorado. Finegan is best known as the former Denver city attorney and former chief of staff to then-Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper. Finegan met with The Gazette’s editorial board last week to discuss the nationwide fentanyl crisis and the overall nationwide surge in crime.

What are federal authorities doing to stem the flow of fentanyl across the U.S. border?

Thank you. That is an excellent question for someone along the border. We are not a border state. So that’s not a question we deal with here in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Colorado. I can tell you we’re working with our partners at the local, state and federal levels to try and stop the flow of fentanyl into Colorado. There are interdiction teams that work around the clock trying to stop this. We certainly know that the I-70 corridor is used out of Mexico. We have seen recent developments and gathered information that shows that the chemicals — the basic ingredients of fentanyl are coming from China into Mexico. And then they’re being put together in labs if you want to call them labs. Certainly not like a pharmaceutical lab you would see at Pfizer or Merck. And then it’s coming up the corridor into Colorado, and it’s frankly coming faster in some ways than we can stop it. We are making record seizures.

I talked recently to Brian Besser, who’s the special agent in charge of the DEA here in Colorado. He’s talked about the pills are now increasingly cheaper and cheaper than they’ve ever been, and the demand is increasing. We can talk about this, and I hope we will in a more robust way. One of the things we talk about in the U.S. Attorney’s Office is we have the tools to prosecute this drug. Fentanyl is a controlled substance under federal law. If you are in possession of it or if you have the intention of distributing it, we have the ability to prosecute you and we will. We also have the ability to hold you. And then lastly, we have got substantial laws if the death of someone can be linked to the fentanyl, and if we can show that the fentanyl was distributed or possessed by that person who did distribute it, then we can pursue and it results in death. We can pursue a sentence of not less than 20 years and up to life, which certainly we will do and we have done that. Recently there was a case last year that we were successful in prosecuting.

We keep hearing this as coming from China. Do you have any information as to who in China is doing this? Is it the Chinese Communist Party? Is it private sector profiteers? What’s the motive and who is it?

What I can tell you is the documents that I have seen is that it just stated that there’s been a significant shift in the relationship between Mexican transnational criminal organizations and Chinese trans-criminal organizations. So, I can’t speak to your question. I mean, I understand what you’re asking me. I just don’t know the answer to that. What we do know is that there is a large amount coming out of China that is supplying the people in Mexico and then that is coming up into the United States.

In 2019, the Colorado Legislature essentially decriminalized Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 drugs, including fentanyl. The state is not taking this terribly seriously. As such, we’re seeing a giant spike in deaths of teenagers, young adults and even babies who contract just a little bit of this drug. Does that give you reason or motivation to increase federal prosecutorial efforts? You can get someone behind bars for 20 or 30 years if they kill someone. Whereas in state law, if the killer calls the police, he’s off the hook.

I really can’t speak to the state law, and I can’t speak to the debate that’s going on up at the Legislature or has gone on up at the Legislature. I attend the Colorado Council of District Attorneys meeting, so I’m aware of the vigorous debate that’s going on there. In answer to your question, in 2021 the U.S. Attorney’s Office obtained 50 indictments on fentanyl-related crimes. That compared to 21 indictments in 2020 and 13 indictments in 2019. So that increase is substantial, and it’s even more striking when you compare it to the indictments on heroin-related crimes, which stayed relatively stable over the same three-year period. There were 65 indictments in 2021 for heroin, 69 in 2020 and 63 in 2019.

Has decriminalization at the state level attracted more drug dealers, creating a bigger headache for federal authorities? A purely factual matter is that state law is currently out of sync with federal law.

As I said, the federal law is different. The federal law is very clear and very direct, which is that fentanyl is a controlled substance. And because it’s a controlled substance, we have the ability to charge those who have it or are distributing it, and we have the ability to obtain sentences. If the fentanyl in some way is directly related to the death of the person, we will charge no less than 20 years and up to life in prison.

You know, fentanyl is heartbreaking. My son grew up with a young man and they were inseparable at one time and then went separate ways. But he (the friend of Finegan’s son) overdosed at 32 on fentanyl. Fentanyl is just an enormous issue, and if you had asked me about it six or eight months ago, I’m not sure I would have known what fentanyl was, other than I might have been mildly familiar with it being a narcotic used in surgeries or other medical treatments.

What is federal law enforcement doing about mass pot plantations in our national forests or on other federal lands? How big a problem is it?

We have not recently had anything brought to us about marijuana being grown on public lands. It certainly doesn’t appear to be happening to the same degree as, say, in 2017.

We do see evidence that there is more growing, more marijuana grows now on private land or in residential properties. So I’ve stated this repeatedly, we take this seriously and we take action. It’s against federal law, it’s very destructive, and we will certainly prosecute where we find it on federal lands. But, fentanyl is clearly the overriding concern at this moment.

Let’s talk about bank robbers. Colorado leads the country in bank robberies. Why? What role might the state’s drug decriminalization play in that? What role does fentanyl play or drug abuse in general?

That’s a good question for a criminologist, and I’m not a criminologist. We’ve certainly started targeting serial bank robbers in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and we began focusing on them in the last year. And our partners in the FBI have made several significant arrests. We have prosecuted those vigorously, and we have a number of those robbers who are going to spend a lot of time in prison. One thing I’ve stated repeatedly is that bank robbery is a violent crime. When someone comes into a bank, whether they have a note or a gun, they are terrorizing everybody in that bank. It is going to be a significant event in those people’s lives and a difficult event for them to recover from. So we take it very seriously. We are working it on a regular basis. And again, I think because we’ve seen these pattern robberies or serial robberies, we now are beginning to take people off the street who are accounting for a number of those robberies. And I’ve certainly seen articles where there has been speculation about whether it is tied to fentanyl or whether it is tied to some sort of drug use.

Do you have a personal opinion on the drug correlation?

There’s linkage, but I don’t know that I’ve ever seen any statistical data that shows it. Certainly, we do not want to be number one in bank robberies.

I would never have considered Colorado a likely mecca of bank robberies.

Yeah, I agree. It is surprising, and I don’t know why. Again, that’s why I say it’s a really good question for a criminologist to try and understand what the links are. … It’s something we’ll certainly keep an eye on. And again, I’m trying to answer your question as best as I can within the parameters of what my job is. Our job is: We will charge the people, and we will prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

Bring us up to speed on cybercrime. What is the risk level in our state? What experiences are you having with it thus far?

Well, it’s certainly an issue. I remember again in one of my first meetings with the Justice Department, meeting with the attorney general and then meeting with the deputy attorney general. It is a major threat to all Coloradans and to all Americans. I would say everybody should be on guard. We should all protect our digital wallets and data with the same care that we protect our physical wallets and purses. Parents, in particular, should educate their children on the safe use of computers and the internet, and they should monitor their children’s activities in an age-appropriate way. We aggressively target cybercriminals who exploit businesses and individuals. And we have a number of experienced prosecutors who work on cases involving, among other things, computer intrusion, child exploitation, digital currency, the darknet, email compromise, human trafficking and fraud involving cellphones and SIM cards.

And, certainly, all of us who are watching what’s happening in the world and what’s unfolding in Ukraine and with Russia, should increase even more our vigilance and concern about cybercrimes.

Let’s talk about guns. Per an anecdote we published, you told your wife recently that there are more guns in this country than you ever thought possible. Could any additional gun control measures rein in the estimated 400 million or more firearms estimated to be in a country? And if not, what else could be done to prevent mass shootings?

Well, it is tragic. The Justice Department is investigating the school shooting in Texas, so it would be inappropriate for me to comment on that. But I do have several things I do want to say on this. We’ve obviously had violent crime and mass shootings in Colorado. My wife, Robin — going back to the Oklahoma City bombing trials — has been very involved in the victim’s world and as an advocate for victims. She was engaged in Columbine and has been involved in helping victims of a number of other mass shootings, including the theater shootings in Aurora. My daughter runs the Colorado Healing Fund, which has been involved in working with the victims of the shooting in Boulder. So this is an area that’s obviously personal to me. And I do want to talk about some things that we are doing in the United States Attorney’s Office specifically to help with gun crime.

Federal law makes it illegal for a felon to possess a firearm. I mean, that is against the law. And we have the ability to charge that person and prosecute that person as a felon. There are certainly some provisions in state law that limit the ability to arrest and charge a felon in possession of a gun, unless that felon committed a felony under a tightly circumscribed set of crimes under the Victims Rights Act in Colorado.

So, we’ve had conversations with the district attorneys and we’ve approached (Denver) Mayor (Michael) Hancock and city attorney Kristin Bronson. And we’ve also had conversations in Aurora with the city. But I want to stay in Denver for a moment. We have approached them and said essentially we have a federal law that will allow us to charge, hold and prosecute felons who are caught with a gun. We simply need more lawyers. And they are working with us, and we are working together to go forward and have as many as four attorneys who would come work with us and would be designated as “special assistant United States attorneys.” They would be here in our office, and they would prosecute those crimes in that jurisdiction. We are offering to work with district attorneys and municipal attorneys and with cities and counties. So I think we’re going to be able to do that in Denver, I hope, with four attorneys. We’re discussing one attorney possibly in Aurora. I’ve had conversations with Colorado Springs District Attorney Michael Allen and with the district attorney in Pueblo, Jeff Costner, about working in partnership with their offices.

Basically you will deputize some attorneys to obtain the human capital needed to enforce this federal gun law?

Yes.

Kind of an end run?

I would say it’s a creative and innovative solution. When I came into this role, we tried to figure out, is there a way that we can help? And this is a way that we can help each other, that we can partner together because we have a law that will enable us to go forward.

The more lawyers we deputize, the more criminals we can prosecute.

Do you worry about criminal defense attorneys pressing the issue of jurisdictional conflicts of interest?

There’s no conflict of interest. The federal law is very clear that we can do this. It is extremely clear.

Well, that’s very encouraging and interesting and, yes, creative. I had not known that that was an option.

Going back to your bigger question. Violent crime is increasing across our country and in Colorado. I’ve lived here 35 years. I lived downtown. We’re watching It happen, and we need to take steps to stop it.

You’re surprised at how many guns there really are out there, and the number we keep hearing is roughly 400 million. Some people think that the government should just pass a law and start reining in a whole bunch of these guns. If we repealed the Second Amendment and passed a federal law to gather up the guns, what are the limitations of federal agencies to rein in 400 million guns, just from a practical consideration?

Yeah. I appreciate your question, but I really can’t speak to that. It just would be inappropriate.

Do you have an opinion on the possibility of the federal government enacting laws that would insulate our schools better, just in a purely practical matter, by keeping unwanted visitors out of them in the first place?

Well, I know there’s a robust debate going on about that. And again, I just can’t answer that question. There’s going to be a debate in Congress. I’m sure there will be conversations throughout the country about this. What I’m focused on is the tools that we have in the United States Attorney’s Office, and we will use every tool that we have to protect children in schools.

When I came in, I met with Attorney General (Merrick) Garland. He talked about a number of principles. Chief among them was our obligation to protect the citizens of the United States against both international and domestic terrorism and to ensure the safety and security of all the citizens of the United States. And that’s our job. And I wish I had the answer. And it’s certainly an issue that we have been grappling with for many years, certainly going back to Columbine in 1999 and going forward.

Were there any unexpected challenges you faced when you assumed your post? What has been the toughest part of your job?

The unexpected challenge, and maybe the toughest part of this job, is that we need more resources. We’re in, I think, the eighth largest state geographically in the nation. I think we’re on our way to having 6 million people by the end of this decade. And we have 80 attorneys and 45 of them are prosecutors. So, we continue to look for creative and innovative ways to stretch our resources to handle all the cases that we have. But that, I would say, has been the toughest part.

President Biden recently signed an executive order on police reform. It creates a national registry of officers who were fired for misconduct. It encourages state and local police to tighten restrictions on things like chokeholds and no-knock warrants. How do you feel that that executive order is going to affect law enforcement nationwide? How do you feel it will affect your job?

One thing the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Office has done is to prosecute those who use excessive force or break the law. One of my predecessors pursued a case in Westminster where there was a police officer who was charged with sexually assaulting an inmate he was transporting home in a patrol car. And in February of 2021, he was sentenced to six years in federal prison for violating the civil rights of the victim. We’re focused on making sure that everyone follows the law and that the police follow the law. We will bring cases where it’s appropriate to enforce those standards.

What about something like no-knock raids and restricting them? They are very important tools, especially in federal drug enforcement.

I appreciate your question. What I can say, as the United States attorney, our job is to follow the rule of law and we will do that.

To what do you attribute the surge in crime we are seeing statewide and nationally?

I’ll say I’ve lived here 35 years. I lived downtown for the last eight years. I live right in the middle of LoDo (Lower Downtown Denver). I travel around our state a lot. It’s clear there’s something happening with crime and with violent crime across our nation and across our state, and we’ve got to figure it out. The tool we have in the United States Attorney’s Office is we have the ability to prosecute criminals.

You spoke about the need to protect houses of worship. The Sacred Heart of Mary Church in Boulder keeps getting attacked. It has been attacked two times in the last year by pro-abortion activists. They spray-paint the church and recently took a hammer to a memorial that sits in the cemetery. Have you been called in, or do you care to get involved in that?

We’ve not been called in, not that I’m aware of. I’m aware of those acts. And let me be clear. We’re opposed to any acts of violence against a house of worship.

Do you plan to look into that last particular attack in Boulder. Can’t you just take the initiative?

If it were brought to our attention or someone brought charges to us or brought information to us, we would certainly look into it.

Well, it’s been in the news. You know about it. Can you just take initiative based on the fact that this has been brought to your attention?

Well, I could certainly have a conversation with the Boulder Police Department.

Okay.

Again, it hasn’t been brought to our attention, and I don’t know if it’s been brought to the district attorney’s attention in Boulder.

The district attorney in Boulder reads the newspaper and watches the news. I mean, it comes to your attention.

Well, we’re not an investigative agency. We work with our partners, our federal law enforcement partners, and our local law enforcement partners. They investigate. We don’t have investigators in our office.

No, but you can choose to prosecute a case just because you know about it. Correct?

I can choose to prosecute a case if the information is brought to us through a particular channel. If it is, we look through the facts of the case and decide whether or not to move forward and seek an indictment.

But it has to come to you from a law enforcement agency?

Yes. We don’t have our own investigators.

Right. But technically, you could simply initiate prosecution because you know of something and are outraged. Take, for example, a school shooting.

Well, I’d have to make sure I have the jurisdictional authority to do that. So, no, I can’t just wake up and do whatever I want.

Understood. Thank you. We greatly appreciate you speaking with us today.