September 25, 2017

Archives for April 4, 2016

Bills Regarding Name Change After Divorce, Unattended Remote Vehicles, and More Signed

On Thursday, March 31, 2016, Governor Hickenlooper signed 8 bills into law, and he signed three more bills on Friday, April 1. To date, the governor has signed 70 bills into law this legislative session. The signed bills include a bill to simplify the name change process for parties to dissolutions of marriage or legal separation if those parties did not request a name change during the dissolution proceedings, a bill to change the name of “area vocational schools” to “area technical colleges,” a bill allowing the use of remote starter systems in unattended vehicles, and a bill allowing reimbursement of travel expenses of members of the Colorado Human Trafficking Council.

March 31, 2016

  • SB 16-121 – Concerning the Percentage of Tuition Revenue that an Institution of Higher Education is Authorized to Pledge for Contracts for the Advancement of Money, by Sen. Jack Tate and Rep. Alec Garnett. The bill allows the governing board of an institution of higher education to pledge up to 100 percent of tuition revenues to fund capital projects.
  • HB 16-1046 – Concerning the Response to Hazardous Substance Incidents Under Designated Emergency Response Authority Responsibility, by Rep. Tracy Kraft-Tharp and Sen. Randy Baumgardner. The bill requires local governments to report to the Colorado State Patrol who they designate as emergency response personnel for hazardous substance incidents, and narrows the appropriate response.
  • HB 16-1061 – Concerning a Requirement that the Transportation Infrastructure Needs of Federal Military Installations be Given Full Consideration During the Preparation of the Comprehensive Statewide Transportation Plan, by Reps. Terri Carver & Dan Nordberg and Sen. Nancy Todd. The bill requires the Colorado Department of Transportation to coordinate with federal military installations within the state when developing statewide transportation plans.
  • HB 16-1082 – Concerning Area Vocational Schools and, in Connection Therewith, Changing the Name of Area Vocational Schools to Area Technical Colleges and Adding Representation for Area Technical Colleges to Certain Boards, by Reps. Alec Garnett & Yeulin Willett and Sen. Nancy Todd. The bill changes all statutory references to “area vocational schools” to “area technical colleges” and adds a representative of area technical colleges to the Concurrent Enrollment Advisory Board and the Colorado Workforce Development Council.
  • HB 16-1085 – Concerning Simplifying the Process for Returning to a Prior Name After a Decree of Dissolution or Legal Separation Has Been Entered, by Rep. Dan Thurlow and Sen. Jack Tate. The bill makes it easier for a person to restore a previous name after a divorce or separation of he or she did not request the name change during the dissolution or separation proceedings.
  • HB 16-1122 – Concerning the Use of Remote Starter Systems on Unattended Vehicles, by Rep. Justin Everett and Sens. Owen Hill & Vicki Marble. The bill exempts vehicles with remote starter systems from the law prohibiting unattended idling as long as the vehicle owner takes precautions against theft.
  • HB 16-1144 – Concerning Transparency in Postsecondary Courses Offered to High School Students, by Reps. Jon Becker & Brittany Pettersen and Sen. Kevin Grantham. Currently, local education providers are required to notify parents and students annually when qualified students are eligible for concurrent enrollment in high school and college. The bill requires local education providers to notify parents and students if the students’ college classes do not qualify for concurrent enrollment.
  • HB 16-1151 – Concerning the Expansion of Penalty Mitigation Under the Alcohol Beverage Laws for Vendors Meeting the Definition of a “Responsible Vendor” as Provided by Law, by Rep. Dan Pabon and Sen. Chris Holbert. The bill requires state and local licensing authorities to consider licensees’ responsible alcohol vendor training as a mitigating factor for certain violations of state liquor laws.

April 1, 2016

  • HB 16-1033 – Concerning the Colorado Human Trafficking Council, by Reps. Beth McCann & Dan Nordberg and Sens. John Kefalas & Linda Newell. The bill allows members of the Colorado Human Trafficking Council to be reimbursed for their travel expenses.
  • HB 16-1038 – Concerning Optional Affiliation with the Fire and Police Pension Association by a County Sheriff Department that Does Not Participate in Social Security, by Reps. Jovan Melton & Joseph Salazar and Sen. Matt Jones. The bill allows counties to elect coverage in the Fire and Police Pension Association even when they decline to participate in Social Security.
  • HB 16-1083 – Concerning the Role and Mission of Western State Colorado University, by Reps. J. Paul Brown & Millie Hamner and Sens. Kerry Donovan & Kevin Grantham. The bill changes the admission standard of Western State Colorado University from “moderately selective” to “selective.”

For all of Governor Hickenlooper’s 2016 legislative decisions, click here.

CJDs Regarding Wiretapping and Access to Court Records Amended

Two of the Colorado Supreme Court’s Chief Justice Directives were amended last week. CJD 85-02, regarding wiretap reports, was updated on March 31, 2016, to include the location of the electronic wiretap form on the United States Court website, provide updated information for submission to the U.S. courts, and to clarify that all applications and extensions are to be reported whether granted or denied.

CJD 05-01, regarding access to court records, was revised on April 1, 2016, based on the review of a subcommittee of Public Access Committee members. The revisions to CJD 05-01 were substantial. A summary of the most substantial changes is reprinted here:

Section 3.00: General Provisions
• Section 3.00 was expanded to include additional definitions of common terms used in this policy.
• Section 3.01 defines the Department’s Case Management System (CMS) as all Department information systems designed to capture, monitor, and track court and probation content.
• Section 3.02 defines the role of the State Court Administrator, Clerks of Court, and Chief Probation Officers as custodians of court records. This Section also states that Clerks of Court are responsible for assigning document or case security levels.
• Section 3.03 provides the definition of “court record” for purposes of this policy. Section 3.03(a)(2) was added to clarify that any records related to a defendant or probationer that are created, collected, received, and maintained by a probation department are court records.

Section 4.40: Access to Aggregate and Compiled Data from Court Records
• Section 4.40(a)(2)(ii) was added to allow (but not require) requests for compiled or aggregate data specific to one judicial district to be submitted to, prepared by, and released from that judicial district. Data requests specific to one judicial district may also be submitted to, prepared by, and released from SCAO.
• Section 4.40(a)(4) was added to clarify that all reports generated from the Department’s CMS constitute compiled or aggregate data. If a request is made to release these reports outside of the Department, all provisions of CJD 05-01 must be met. This includes all reports created through COGNOS, and management reports generated through ICON/Eclipse/JPOD, etc.
• Section 4.40(f)(4) was added to recognize the need of interagency teams/Best Practice Teams to share information within the team that includes personally identifiable data, and to require the use of a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the protection and use of data.

Section 4.60: Court Records Excluded from Public Access
• Section 4.60(b)(7) was amended to add Probate protected proceedings case types to those case classes/types that are not accessible to the public unless the court orders otherwise.
• Section 4.60(d) was amended to alphabetically list records that are not accessible to the public without a court order.
• Additional records were added to the list, including: (1) Audio/Video recordings collected, received, and maintained by the Court; (7) Domestic Relations Memoranda of Understanding, and Qualified Domestic Relations Orders; (19) Medical marijuana registry application or card; (20) Motion for Informa Pauperis; and (21) National Crime Information Center (NCIC) or Colorado Crime Information Center (CCIC) printed reports.
• Criminal history records checks were removed from this list.
• Section 4.60(e)(6) was amended to clarify that Social Security Numbers (SSNs), including partial SSNs, are to be redacted from pleadings or documents prior to being released.
• Section 4.60(e)(7) was added and requires that tax identification numbers be redacted from pleadings or documents prior to being released.

Section 5.00: Accessing Court Records
• Section 5.00 was amended to align more closely with the requirements outlined in P.A.I.R.R. 2 (Public Access to Administrative Records of the Judicial Branch) regarding the procedure to access records.
• Section 5.00(d) was amended to clarify that if court records cannot be provided upon request, the custodian will provide court records within three business days. If, due to extenuating circumstances, the custodian cannot provide records within three business days, the custodian may have an additional seven business days to respond.
• Sections 5.00 (d)(1-5) provides definitions of the extenuating circumstances under which the custodian may provide court records within the seven business day extension.

Addendum C: Data Request for Purposes or Research, Including Personally Identifiable Data, Pursuant to Section 4.40(f) was created to be used with researchers that request compiled data that includes personally identifiable data components.

Although e-filing specifications are not defined in CJD 05-01, this policy does address “court records subject to remote access” (Section 4.20). As a result, the Public Access Committee also approved case information for Probate trust and estate case types to be opened via remote access in ICCES. ITS requires sufficient time to make necessary updates to ICCES, therefore, this change will occur on or before 9/1/2016. For probate trust and estate cases filed prior to 9/1/16, the security level of public documents filed in these cases will be “protected”; after 9/1/16, only certain public documents (to be specified by the Clerks of Court) will be auto-protected.

For all of the Colorado Supreme Court’s Chief Justice Directives, click here.

Tenth Circuit: No Fourth Amendment Violation When Officer Arrested 11-Year-Old Special Education Student

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in J.H. v. Bernalillo County on Friday, November 27, 2015.

J.P. was an 11-year-old special needs student in a special education classroom when a school resource officer, Deputy Sharkey, saw her kick her teacher. Deputy Sharkey arrested J.P. and handcuffed her, then transported her to a juvenile detention facility. J.P.’s mom, J.H., sued Deputy Sharkey and the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Office under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The district court dismissed the due process claims and granted summary judgment to Deputy Sharkey and the county on the Fourth Amendment and ADA claims. J.H. appealed.

On appeal, J.H. contended the district court erred in granting summary judgment because Deputy Sharkey lacked probable cause and used excessive force in arresting J.P. The Tenth Circuit disagreed, noting that J.P. assaulted her teacher by kicking her and that provided probable cause for the arrest. The Tenth Circuit noted that J.H.’s argument was invalid because Deputy Sharkey could lawfully arrest J.P. after observing her commit the crime of kicking her teacher. J.H. argued the crime could not constitute a felony because J.P. was a minor at the time, but did not deny that the kick was unlawful. The Tenth Circuit found this fatal to J.H.’s arguments.

J.H. also contended that Deputy Sharkey used excessive force by handcuffing J.P., but the Tenth Circuit again disagreed, finding nothing excessive about the use of handcuffs. The Tenth Circuit noted that once he made the arrest, Deputy Sharkey was free to protect himself by restricting J.P.’s freedom of movement. The Tenth Circuit similarly rejected J.H.’s ADA claims, finding that J.P. never requested an accommodation so Deputy Sharkey could not have erred in failing to provide one. The Circuit likewise found no error in taking J.P. to the juvenile detention center instead of waiting for her mother to arrive at the school.

The Tenth Circuit next addressed J.H.’s Fourteenth Amendment Due Process claims, which were premised on the same arguments as the Fourth Amendment claims. The Tenth Circuit found that the district court properly dismissed the Fourteenth Amendment claims because J.H.’s factual allegations did not implicate the Fourteenth Amendment.

Finally, the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment on J.H.’s ADA claims. J.H. alleged that Deputy Sharkey discriminated against J.P. by making the arrest based on manifestations of her disability and failing to make reasonable accommodations during the arrest. The Tenth Circuit denied that Deputy Sharkey had reason to be aware of J.P.’s disability and reasoned that since J.P. did not request an accommodation, Deputy Sharkey did not err in failing to provide one.

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court.

Tenth Circuit: Unpublished Opinions, 4/1/2016

On Friday, April 1, 2016, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued one published opinion and eight unpublished opinions.

Yarbury v. Martin, Pringle, Oliver, Wallace & Bauer, L.L.P.

United States v. Briggs

United States v. Peterman

Cross v. Bear

United States v. Scott

Marshall v. Oliver

Nebeker v. National Auto Plaza

United States v. Green

Case summaries are not provided for unpublished opinions. However, published opinions are summarized and provided by Legal Connection.