May 24, 2013

You are here: Home / Archives for CBA-CLE Staff

SB 13-288: Revising the Process by Which the General Assembly Approves Payments to Claimants in Excess of the Limits of the CGIA

May 10, 2013 by Leave a Comment

On Monday, April 29, 2013, Sen. Bill Cadman introduced SB 13-288 – Concerning the Process by Which the General Assembly Approves Recommendations Made by the State Claims Board for an Additional Payment to Claimants that Exceeds the Maximum Liability Under the “Colorado Governmental Immunity Act.” This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

Current law authorizes a person with tort claims against the state brought under the “Colorado Governmental Immunity Act” (CGIA) to recover an additional payment against the state where the state claims board (board) compromises or settles a claim on behalf of the state for the maximum liability limits under the CGIA and determines, in its sole discretion, to recommend to the general assembly that the general assembly, by bill, authorize all or any portion of the additional payment.

The bill makes the following modifications to these provisions:

  • The bill clarifies the existing method for exceeding the CGIA limit based on the board recommendation and authorization through a bill.
  • In connection with a recommendation made by the board to make a payment to one or more claimants resulting from a claim of an injury arising out of the lower north fork wildfire in March 2012 that is received by the general assembly while the general assembly is adjourned sine die, upon certification from the department of law that the board process has been satisfied and on or after July 1, 2013, the bill authorizes the office of the state controller to pay one or more additional payments to such claimants from moneys previously appropriated by bill until such specifically appropriated moneys are exhausted or replenished.
  • In connection with any claim arising out of an injury occurring on or after the effective date of the bill that does not arise out of the lower north fork wildfire, where the board has made a recommendation to the general assembly for an additional payment while the general assembly has adjourned sine die, the payment is authorized where all of the members of the joint budget committee have voted to authorize the additional payment; except that the bill prohibits payment from being made until the general assembly has ratified by bill the authorization to make the payment.

The bill was introduced on April 29 and assigned to the Finance Committee. The Finance Committee approved the bill on May 2 and sent it to the Senate consent calendar for consideration on 2nd Reading. On May 3, the Senate approved the bill on 2nd Reading; the bill is now on the 3rd Reading calendar in the Senate.

Since this summary, the bill passed the Senate on Third Reading and was introduced in the House. It was assigned to the State, Veterans, & Military Affairs Committee, which referred it unamended to the House Committee of the Whole. It then passed the House on Second and Third Readings.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , ,

SB 13-287: Amending Certain Provision Relating to Telecommunications

May 10, 2013 by Leave a Comment

On Monday, April 29, 2013, Sen. Jeanne Nicholson introduced SB 13-287 – Concerning Telecommunications. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The high cost support mechanism reimburses some of the cost of providing telephone services to rural areas. The bill adds broadband internet service in unserved and underserved areas to the services that are reimbursable.

As introduced, the bill exempts voice-over-internet-protocol service and internet-protocol-enabled service from regulation by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and exempts broadband service from state sales tax. It also exempts basic local exchange service from regulation in geographic areas in which the PUC has determined that effective competition exists.

The bill clarifies that this exemption does not affect an entity’s rights and obligations under federal law, nor does it affect the PUC’s authority with respect to: Wholesale telecommunications rates; services; agreements; providers; tariffs; the resolution of disputes regarding intercarrier compensation; or oversight of the implementation of a next-generation 911 plan with regard to interoperability and performance, operational, and system standards.

The bill was introduced on April 29 and assigned to the State, Veterans, & Military Affairs Committee. On May 1, the State, Veterans, & Military Affairs amended the bill and sent it to the full Senate for consideration on 2nd Reading.

Since this summary, the bill lost with amendments on Second Reading in the Senate. It was laid over until May 10, 2013.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , ,

HB 13-1325: Establishing THC Blood Levels for Purposes of DUI Law

May 9, 2013 by Leave a Comment

On May 2, 2013, Rep. Rhonda Fields introduced HB 13-1325 - Concerning Penalties for Persons who Drive While Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

In any DUI prosecution, if at the time of driving or within a reasonable time thereafter, the driver’s blood contains five nanograms or more of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol per milliliter in whole blood, as shown by analysis of the defendant’s blood, such fact gives rise to a permissible inference that the defendant was under the influence of one or more drugs.

Under current law, in any prosecution for vehicular homicide or vehicular assault, if at the time of the commission of the alleged offense, or within a reasonable time thereafter, as shown by analysis of the defendant’s blood or breath, there was 0.08 or more grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood, or if there was at such time 0.08 or more grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath, it is presumed that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol. The bill removes this presumption and states instead that such fact gives rise to a permissible inference that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol.

The bill removes instances of the term “habitual user” from the traffic code.

The bill was introduced on May 2 and approved, with amendments, by the Judiciary Committee on that same day. On May 3, the Appropriations Committee approved the bill and sent it to the full House for consideration on 2nd Reading. 2nd Reading is scheduled for Monday, May 6.

Since this summary, the bill made it through Second Reading unamended and passed Third Reading in the Senate.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Charity Fundraiser to Benefit Denver Urban Scholars to be Held at Space Gallery

May 8, 2013 by Leave a Comment

Screen shot 2013-05-07 at 11.34.17 AMThe CBA Young Lawyers Division will host its 2013 Annual Charity Fundraiser and silent auction at Space Gallery on Friday, May 31, from 5:30 to 9 p.m. This year’s benefiting charity is Denver Urban Scholars, a nonprofit that provides financial, academic, and emotional support to students experiencing risk factors that reduce their odds of graduating high school. 

Denver Urban Scholars is a Denver nonprofit committed to helping metro-area high school students graduate high school, enter higher education, and develop a life-plan for success. They serve students with great potential who are at high risk for dropping out. Each youth in Denver who drops out incurs an estimated $524,000 in lost wages and public services over his or her lifetime. Youth who drop out of school have higher arrest rates, less chance for employment, lower incomes as adults, and have poorer health outcomes.

Denver Urban Scholars has helped over 400 disadvantaged students graduate from high school. Over the past four years, an average 84.2 percent of students who entered the program as freshmen graduated while in the program; 92 percent of our graduates have gone on to college.

Join the CBA Young Lawyers Division on Friday, May 31, from 5:30 to 9 pm at Space Gallery to help support the Denver Urban Scholars and the important work that they do. For more information about the event or to register, click here. For information about the CBA Young Lawyers Division, click here.

Filed Under: Community Tagged With: , , ,

HB 13-1324: Adding Two Members of the General Assembly to the State Internet Portal Authority Board of Directors

May 8, 2013 by Leave a Comment

On April 29, 2013, Rep. Carole Murray and Sen. Jeanne Nicholson introduced HB 13-1324 - Concerning the Addition of Members of the General Assembly to the Board of Directors of the Statewide Internet Portal Authority. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill enlarges the board of directors of the statewide Internet portal authority from 13 to 15 members by adding a member who is appointed by the minority leader in the Senate and a member who is appointed by the minority leader in the House of Representatives. The bill also specifies when the appointments are to be made and when the terms of the new board members begin and end.

The bill was introduced in the House on April 29 and passed out of the Business, Labor, Economic, & Workforce Development Committee on May 2. The House approved the bill on 2nd Reading May 2 and 3rd Reading on May 3. The bill was then introduced in the Senate on May 3 and passed out of the Judiciary Committee and is now on the 2nd Reading Consent calendar in the Senate.

Since this summary, the bill passed Second Reading in the Senate, unamended, and also passed Third Reading in the Senate.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , ,

HB 13-1323: Requiring Clarification by Court if Mittimus Does Not Specify Whether Sentences to be Served Consecutively or Concurrently

May 8, 2013 by Leave a Comment

On April 29, 2013, Rep. Claire Levy and Sen. Lucia Guzman introduced HB 13-1323 - Concerning Requiring the Department of Corrections to Obtain Clarification if a Court-Issued Mittimus Omits Instruction Concerning Whether a Defendant’s Sentences are to be Served Consecutively or Concurrently. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill states, as amended, if the state department of corrections (department) receives custody of a defendant who is sentenced to serve two or more terms of incarceration in the custody of the department, and any mittimus concerning the defendant’s sentence or sentences does not clearly indicate whether the defendant’s sentences are to be served consecutively or concurrently, the department shall seek clarification in writing from the court regarding the defendant’s sentence or sentences. The department shall seek such clarification not more than two business days after the department’s receipt of the mittimus.

A court that receives a written request for clarification from the department shall respond to the department and clarify the mittimus in writing not more than two business days after receiving the request. The court shall provide a copy of the court’s response to the counsel of record for the prosecution and the defense.

Until the department obtains clarification of the mittimus from the court, the department shall not make any determination of the defendant’s parole eligibility date or mandatory release date.

Before remitting any mittimus to the department of corrections sentencing a defendant to the custody of the department, a court shall confirm that the mittimus properly reflects the sentencing order of the court and includes all necessary information regarding the sentence and any information as to whether a sentence is to be served concurrent with, or consecutive to, the sentence for any other count or any other case.

The bill was introduced in the House on April 29 and passed out of the Judiciary Committee on April 30. The House approved the bill on 2nd Reading May 2 and the 3rd Reading on May 3. The bill was introduced in the Senate on May 3 and passed out of the Judiciary Committee and 2nd Reading on the same day. The bill awaits 3rd Reading in the Senate on Monday, May 6.

Since this summary, the bill passed Third Reading in the Senate and will be sent to the governor for signature.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , , ,

e-Legislative Report, 5/6/13

May 7, 2013 by Leave a Comment

CBA Director of Legislative Relations Michael Valdez issued his weekly e-Legislative Report on May 6, 2013. In this edition, he gives a day-by-day report of what happened at the legislature during the week of April 29. He also summarizes a few more late bills of interest, and notes that the CBA Legislative Policy Committee did not meet on May 3.

At the Capitol

Boxscores

Monday, April 29

  • The House adopted the conference committee report for HB 13-1058. Concerning guidelines for the determination of spousal maintenance (advisory guideline formula to determine spousal maintenance). The adoption of the conference committee report signals the end of the legislative journey for the bill; the bill now heads to Gov. John Hickenlooper for action. The final Senate version of the bill is what the Governor will see when the bill gets to his desk.
  • The House adopted the conference committee report for HB 13-1204. Concerning the “Uniform Premarital and Marital Agreements Act.” The conference committee report made a conforming amendment to the act to address changes made in SB 13-11. Civil Unions.
  • The House adopted the conference committee report for HB 13-1200. Concerning the “Uniform Deployed Parents Custody and Visitation Act.” The conference committee report adopted several important amendments suggested by the Family Law Section.
  • The House adopted HB 13-1317. Concerning the recommendations made in the public process for the purpose of implementing retail marijuana legalized by section 16 of article XVIII of the Colorado constitution, and in connection therewith, making an appropriation on 3rd Reading by a vote of 35 yes, 29, no, and 1 excused.
  • The Senate approved 13-1246. Concerning modifications in connection with current property tax exemptions for nonprofit organizations on 3rd and final reading by a vote of 35–0.
  • The Senate approved 13-255. Concerning child fatality review teams, and, in connection therewith, increasing the capacity and resources, clarifying the responsibilities and processes of state and local child fatality review teams in the departments of public health and environment and human services, and making an appropriation on a 22–13 vote.

Tuesday, April 30

  • The Senate adopted HB 1163. Concerning payment for medical costs associated with obtaining a medical forensic examination for victims of sexual offenses, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation on 3rd Reading on a 35–0 vote.
  • The Senate approved HB 12-1276. Concerning limitations on the actions a unit owners’ association under the “Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act” may take against a unit owner with respect to the collection of debt owed to the unit owners’ association by a 35–0 vote.
  • The Senate passed 13-1142. Concerning reforms to the “Urban and Rural Enterprise Zone Act,” and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation on a vote of 21–14.
  • The Senate adopted HB 13-1156. Concerning creation of an adult diversion program, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation on a 35–0 vote.
  • The Senate gave final approval to HB 13-1138. Concerning benefit corporations, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation on a party line vote 20–15. The bill was sent back to the House for consideration of the Senate amendments.
  • The Senate adopted HB 13-1134. Concerning unit owners’ associations under the “Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act” on a party line vote of 20–15.
  • The Senate unanimously approved SB 13-271. Concerning funding for the address confidentiality program on 3rd and final reading.
  • With a smidgen of bipartisan support, the Senate gave final approval of HB 13-1266. Concerning the alignment of state health insurance laws with the requirements of the federal “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” on a vote of 21–14.
  • The Senate adopted on 3rd and final Reading HB 13-1082. Concerning juvenile delinquency records on a 35–0 vote.
  • The House gave final approval of SB 13-252. Concerning measures to increase Colorado’s renewable energy standard so as to encourage the deployment of methane capture technologies on a vote of 37 yes, 27 no, and 1 excused.
  • The House adopted HB 13-1318. Concerning the recommendations made in the public process for the purpose of implementing certain state taxes on retail marijuana legalized by section 16 of article XVIII of the Colorado constitution, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation on a vote of 37 yes, 27 no, and 1 excused.
  • The House approved HB 13-1306. Concerning creating a task force to consider persons who pose a threat of harm to themselves or others on 3rd and final reading; the vote: 35 yes, 29 no, and 1 excused.

Wednesday, May 1

  • The House adopted—34 yes, 28 no, and one excused—HB 13-1316. Concerning the Colorado oil and gas conservation commission’s adoption of uniform statewide groundwater sampling rules, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation.
  • The House approved SB 13-47. Concerning protections for youth in foster care against identity theft, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation on a vote of 63 yes, 1 no, and one excused.
  • The House approved 13-246. Concerning creation of a task force to study discovery costs in criminal case by a vote of 64 yes, 1 no, and 1 excused.
  • The House adopted HB 13-111. Concerning abuse of at-risk adults, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation by a vote of 56 yes, 8 no, and 1 absent.
  • The House voted to concur with the amendments added by the Senate to HB 13-1138. Concerning benefit corporations, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation. The Senate amendments to the bill represent a significant compromise on the bill. The motion to concur with Senate amendments was passed on a vote of 37 yes, 27 no, and 1 excused.
  • The House voted to concur with the amendments added by the Senate to HB 13-1276. Concerning limitations on the actions a unit owners’ association under the “Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act” may take against a unit owner with respect to the collection of debt owed to the unit owners’ association; the vote: 47 yes, 17 no, and 1 excused.
  • The House voted to concur with the amendments added by the Senate to HB 13-1156. Concerning creation of an adult diversion program, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation on a vote of 61 yes, 3 no, and 1 excused.
  • The Senate gave its final approval to 13-250. Concerning changes to sentencing of persons convicted of drug crimes, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation. The final vote was 34–1.
  • The Senate gave final approval to SB 13-244. Concerning a task force to study substance abuse. The final vote was 34–1.

Thursday, May 2

  • The Senate adopted HB 13-1230. Concerning compensation for persons who are exonerated of their crimes after a period of incarceration, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation on a vote 32 yes, 0 no, and 3 excused.
  • The Senate gave final approval to HB 13-1240. Concerning penalties for persistent drunk drivers, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation on a vote 32 yes, 0 no, and 3 excused.
  • Adopted on a vote of 33 yes, 1, no, and 1 excused, the Senate gave final support for HB 13-1160. Concerning criminal theft, and, in connection therewith, reducing an appropriation.
  • The Senate gave final approval of SB 13-283. Concerning implementation of amendment 64, and, in connection therewith, making and reducing an appropriation. The vote was 32 yes, 2, no, and 1 excused.
  • The Senate voted to concur with the House amendments to SB 13-111. Concerning abuse of at-risk adults, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation (Mandatory reporting of elder abuse). The vote to concur was 24 yes, 10 no, and 1 excused.
  • The Senate voted to concur with the House amendments to SB 13-147. Concerning protections for youth in foster care against identity theft, and, in connection therewith, making an appropriation. The vote to concur was 34 yes, 0 no, and 1 excused.

Friday, May 3

  • The House gave final approval to SB 13-262. Concerning the exemption of representative services of enrolled agents from the definition of debt management services. The vote was unanimous—65-0.
  • On 3rd and final reading, the House adopted HB 13-1323. Concerning requiring the department of corrections to obtain clarification if a court-issued mittimus omits instruction concerning whether a defendant’s sentences are to be served consecutively or concurrently on a vote of 65–0.
  • The Senate gave final approval to HB 13-1284, Concerning documents that can be filed regarding security interests under the “Uniform Commercial Code.”

The full e-Legislative Report, including summaries of late bills of interest, can be found here.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

SB 13-286: Extending the Time that Renewable Energy Companies May Carry Over Excess Enterprise Zone Investment Tax Credits

May 6, 2013 by Leave a Comment

On Wednesday, April 24, 2013, Sen. Mary Hodge introduced SB 13-286 – Concerning an Extension of the Number of Years that a Renewable Energy Company May Claim Excess Enterprise Zone Investment Income Tax Credits as Credit Carryovers. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill gives renewable energy companies extended carryover periods for enterprise zone investment tax credits that such renewable energy companies have earned in the past and may earn in the future.

The bill was introduced on April 24 and has been assigned to the Finance Committee. The bill is on the Finance Committee schedule Tuesday, April 30 at 1:30 p.m.

Since this summary, the bill was referred, unamended, to the Senate Committee of the Whole.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , , ,

SB 13-285: Revising Certain Procedures for the Resolution of Workers’ Compensation Claim Disputes

May 6, 2013 by 1 Comment

On Wednesday, April 24, 2013, Sen. Lois Tochtrop introduced SB 13-285 – Concerning the Procedures in Workers’ Compensation Claims for the Resolution of Disputes. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill requires a claimant to be reimbursed by the employer or workers’ compensation carrier for medical treatment provided if the employer, after notice of the injury, fails to provide medical treatment.

After notice of termination of a fringe benefit or other advantage, the employer, carrier, or third-party administrator is required to recalculate the average weekly wage and begin payment of the wages based on the recalculated amount.

The bill requires temporary partial disability to be paid at least once every two weeks and requires an employer, carrier, or third-party administrator to provide a claimant a complete copy of the claim file within 15 days after the mailing of a written request.

In order to request attorney fees and costs when an opposing attorney requests a hearing for an unripe issue, the requesting party must prove that it attempted to have any unripe issues stricken by a prehearing administrative law judge. Fees and costs may only be awarded if they are directly caused by the listing of the unripe issue.

The bill extends the amount of time that must pass before an employer or insurer may request an independent medical examiner if the treating physician has not determined that an injured worker has reached maximum medical improvement from 18 to 24 months. If the independent medical examiner selected determines that the worker has reached maximum medical improvement, the independent medical examiner shall also determine the worker’s permanent medical impairment.

The bill was introduced on April 24 and has been assigned to the Business, Labor, & Technology Committee. The bill is on the Business, Labor & Technology Committee schedule for Monday, April 29 at 1:30 p.m.

Since this summary, the bill was referred, amended, to the Senate Committee of the Whole.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , ,

SB 13-284: Providing for Expedited Air Quality Permitting for Oil and Gas Operators that Certify that They Will Use Certain Pollution Control Technology

May 6, 2013 by Leave a Comment

On Tuesday, April 23, 2013, Sen. Morgan Carroll introduced SB 13-284 – Concerning Streamlining the Environmental Permitting of Oil and Gas Development that Meets Enhanced Environmental Protection Standards. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill requires the division of administration in the department of public health and environment to provide for expedited air quality permitting for oil and gas operations for operators that certify that they will use pollution control technology that meets enhanced environmental and human health protection standards as established either by the division through guidance or by the air quality control commission by rule. The bill allows the division to provide an analogous permitting schedule and enhanced standards for water quality permitting either by the division through guidance or by the water quality control commission by rule.

The bill was introduced on April 23 and assigned to the Agriculture, Natural Resources, & Energy Committee. The bill is on the Agriculture, Natural Resources, & Energy Committee schedule for Tuesday, April 30 at 8 a.m.

Since this summary, the bill was referred, amended, to the Senate Committee of the Whole.

Filed Under: Legislation Tagged With: , , ,

Colorado Court of Appeals: Trial Court’s Imposition of Fine in Excess of Damages Upheld

May 3, 2013 by Leave a Comment

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in In re Estate of Hossack: Robinson v. Hossack on Thursday, April 25, 2013.

Contempt—Fine as Remedial Sanction for Contempt.

Gladys Robinson appealed the trial court’s order denying her motion to set aside a judgment in favor of decedent’s children and against Robinson in the sum of $231,300. The order was affirmed.

Robinson lived with the decedent, Charles Erroll Hossack, at the time of his death. Following the settlement of his estate, the court ordered her to return specified items of personal property to Lori and Kirk Hossack, decedent’s children. Robinson did not comply.

In a written order issued November 14, 2007, made effective nunc pro tunc August 21, 2007, the court found Robinson in contempt because she did not return the property. Robinson did not timely appeal the contempt order and did not comply with its terms. The fines that were imposed ($100 per day and later $1,000 per day) eventually accumulated to a sum of $231,300.

The decedent’s children moved to reduce this amount to judgment in March 2008. This motion was granted in January 2010, with interest accruing at 8% annually.

Robinson moved under CRCP 60(b)(3) to set aside the judgment. She argued that the amount of the fine should have been limited to any damages the decedent’s children may have suffered. The trial court denied the motion, and Robinson appealed.

CRCP 60(b)(3) allows a court to grant a party relief from a void judgment. Robinson based her argument on cases and language in CRCP 107(d) that limited the amount of a remedial fine to the damages the adverse party suffered. Due to amendments to the rule, effective April 1, 1995, the rule now defines remedial sanctions for contempt to be “[s]anctions imposed to force compliance with a lawful order or to compel performance of an act within the person’s power or present ability to perform.” It also empowers the court to continue to fine a contemnor until an act ordered to be performed is performed.

Robinson also argued that any fine could only be payable to the court and not to decedent’s children. The Court found no authority for this argument. Accordingly, the order was affirmed.

Summary and full case available here.

Filed Under: Case Law Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Colorado Court of Appeals: Death Row Inmate’s Challenge to Procedure for Lethal Injection Denied

May 3, 2013 by Leave a Comment

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Dunlap v. Colorado Department of Corrections on Thursday, April 25, 2013.

Death by Lethal Injection—Administrative Procedure Act—CRS § 17-1-111.

Nathan J. Dunlap, a death row inmate in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections (DOC), appealed the district court’s judgment denying his challenge to the DOC’s regulation establishing the procedure for carrying out the death penalty by lethal injection. The judgment was affirmed.

Colorado law provides for imposition of the death penalty by lethal injection. The implementation of such a sentence is entrusted to the DOC. The Executive Director promulgated Administrative Regulation 300-14 (regulation), effective June 1, 2011, “to establish procedures, consistent with Colorado statutes, governing death penalty executions.”

Dunlap was sentenced to death for murdering four people at a Chuck E. Cheese restaurant in Aurora in 1993. He filed a complaint under § 24-4-106(4) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), claiming that the DOC had violated the APA in promulgating this regulation. Specifically, he alleged that the DOC had failed to comply with the rule-making procedures of § 24-4-103.

Defendants moved to dismiss under CRCP 12(b)(1) and (5). The subject matter argument was based on § 17-1-111, which exempts the regulation from the procedural requirements of § 24-4-103 of the APA. The district court granted the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

On appeal, Dunlap argued that § 17-1-111 should not apply because the Executive Director’s statutory authority to administer the death penalty is found in Title 18 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, not Title 17. The Court of Appeals disagreed. The fact that the source of the authority to carry out a death sentence is found in Title 18 is not dispositive of whether the regulation relates to a matter within Title 17.

Dunlap also argued that the phrase “placement, assignment, management, discipline, and classification of inmates” in § 17-1-111 has nothing to do with the implementation of a death sentence. The Court disagreed. In the context of Title 17, this language clearly encompasses determinations concerning the conditions under which sentences served by DOC inmates are to be carried out. The judgment was affirmed.

Summary and full case available here.

Filed Under: Case Law Tagged With: , , , ,
«Older Posts
Newer Posts»
Protected

2013-05-25 05:50:34