Get above the noise
Log in for answers tailored to you — saved chats, your topics, and the full IJR suite.
In Re SD
Colorado Court of Appeals · 2010-09-30
In this case, an adult adoptee sought to rescind her 1974 adoption, claiming the decree was void because her birth father had never relinquished his parental rights and the court lacked jurisdiction. The district court denied her motions, and the Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. The court held that Colorado law does not permit an adoptee to dissolve a valid adoption at will, and any challenge based on jurisdictional defects was barred by the two-year statute of limitations in effect at the time of the adoption. Even allowing for tolling due to minority or delayed discovery, the petitioner waited over thirty years, which exceeded a reasonable time. Requests regarding birth records were not addressed as they had not been ruled on below.
family lawprocedure
People Ex Rel. Ag
Colorado Court of Appeals · 2010-04-15 · cited 3×
The case involved a mother's appeal from a trial court judgment terminating her parental rights to four children in a dependency and neglect proceeding that began after a child's death from chronic abuse and neglect in her home. The children had been placed with their fathers, and the department sought termination partly based on an unfavorable psychological evaluation of the mother. The Colorado Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, concluding that the trial judge should have recused himself because his court clerk's mother was the caseworker, creating an appearance of bias under Colorado statutes and rules on judicial disqualification, even without actual prejudice. The court directed further proceedings to address whether the mother waived the recusal claim, whether she received ineffective assistance of counsel for not raising it timely, and other issues such as the treatment plan and less drastic alternatives to termination.
family lawprocedure
Wiesner v. Huber
Colorado Court of Appeals · 2010-03-04 · cited 7×
The case involved Paul Wiesner appealing the suspension of his driver's license and classification as a "persistent drunk driver" by the Colorado Department of Revenue following a DUI arrest with conflicting blood alcohol content (BAC) test results of 0.18 and 0.165. The court reversed the district court's affirmation of the Department's order, holding that the statutory presumption of accuracy for the law enforcement's BAC test applied only to the license revocation determination at the 0.08 threshold and not to the higher 0.17 threshold for the "persistent drunk driver" finding. The core reasoning was based on the plain language of the statute, which referred the presumption specifically to the revocation issue and did not extend it to the persistent drunk driver classification, leading to a remand for further factual findings without the improper presumption.
criminal lawprocedure
People v. Taylor
Colorado Court of Appeals · 2009-11-12 · cited 8×
In People v. Taylor, the defendant was convicted of illegal discharge of a firearm, a class five felony, and third-degree assault after an incident where he allegedly fired a gun during a confrontation at his apartment involving his ex-girlfriend and her friends, resulting in injuries. The trial court refused to instruct the jury on self-defense for the illegal discharge charge, despite the defendant's testimony and arguments that he acted in self-defense. The appellate court reversed the conviction for illegal discharge of a firearm, holding that because the offense requires a knowing mental state and is thus a general intent crime, self-defense is an applicable affirmative defense that the prosecution must disprove, and the failure to instruct on it was reversible error requiring a new trial.
criminal lawguns
Day v. Johnson
Colorado Court of Appeals · 2009-09-03 · cited 165×
In this medical malpractice case, plaintiffs Loretta Jean Day and Richard C. Day sued defendant Bruce Johnson, M.D., alleging negligence in recommending and performing thyroid surgery that resulted in injury to Ms. Day's larynx. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the trial court entered judgment accordingly. Plaintiffs appealed, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by denying challenges for cause against two jurors and by giving a jury instruction stating that an unsuccessful medical procedure does not necessarily indicate negligence. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the record supported the trial court's rulings on the juror challenges under C.R.C.P. 47(e) because any interest was speculative, and that the instruction accurately reflected Colorado law that an injury alone does not establish negligence without proof of duty and breach.
torts & liabilityhealthcareprocedure
People Ex Rel. Dw
Colorado Court of Appeals · 2009-09-03 · cited 2×
In this juvenile delinquency case, D.W. pleaded guilty to acts that would constitute sexual assault on a child if committed by an adult, after which the trial court ordered him to pay restitution for the victim's family's expenses in selling their home to move away from him, including home repairs, real estate commissions, and some of the father's lost wages. D.W. appealed the restitution order, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove his conduct proximately caused those losses. The Colorado Court of Appeals vacated the portions of the order tied to the house sale, holding that the People did not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that D.W. posed an ongoing and specific threat to the victim, as the protective order had not been violated and no other competent evidence supported the claimed causal link. The court remanded for a modified order limiting lost wages to time spent assisting the victim rather than preparing the house. The decision turned on the statutory definition of restitution, which requires losses to be proximately caused by the offender's conduct.
criminal lawprocedure