February 19, 2018

CJD 05-03 Amended Regarding Management Plan for Court Reporting and Recording

On Friday, January 19, 2018, the Colorado Supreme Court amended Chief Justice Directive 05-03, “Management Plan for Court Reporting and Recording Services.” This CJD was amended to reflect recent changes to C.A.R. 10 and 11, effective for appeals filed on or after January 1, 2018. The full text of the CJD is available here. For all of the Colorado Supreme Court’s Chief Justice Directives, click here.

Filing Fees Amended Along with Forms in Domestic, Probate, Seal My Case, and Other Categories

The Colorado State Judicial Branch continues to revise its JDF forms. In February and March 2014, forms were revised in the Adoption, Appeals, Domestic, Garnishment & Judgment, Probate, and Seal My Case categories, and the filing fees were also amended. Additionally, forms were added to the Seal My Case category regarding juvenile contacts with law enforcement that do not result in referrals to other agencies.

Forms are available here for download in PDF format. Forms are available as Word documents from the State Judicial website.

ADOPTION

  • JDF 526 – “Affidavit of Diligent Efforts” (R2/14)

APPEALS

  • JDF 126 – “Instructions to File a Small Claims or County Civil Appeal” (R2/14)

DOMESTIC

  • JDF 211 – “Motion to Reduce Payment for ODR Services and Supporting Financial Affidavit” (R3/14)
  • JDF 1804 – “Income Withholding for Support” (R2/14)

FEES

  • JDF 1 – “Filing Fees, Surcharges, and Costs in Colorado Courts” (R2/14)
  • JDF 205 – “Motion to File Without Payment of Filing Fee/Waive Other Costs Owed to the State and Supporting Affidavit” (R3/14)

GARNISHMENTS & JUDGMENTS

  • JDF 125 – “Order for Revival of Judgment” (R3/14)

PROBATE

  • JDF 998 – “Instructions for Completing Affidavit for Collection of Personal Property” (R2/14)
  • JDF 999 – “Collection of Personal Property by Affidavit” (R2/14)

SEAL MY CASE

  • JDF 301 – “Instructions to File an Expungement Juvenile ‘JD’ Case, Criminal ‘CR’ Case, or Municipal Case” (R3/14)
  • JDF 302 – “Petition for Expungement of Records” (R3/14)
  • JDF 303 – “Notice of Hearing on Petition for Expungement” (R3/14)
  • JDF 304 – “Order of Expungement of Records” (R3/14)
  • JDF 324 – “Petition for Expungement of Records for a Law Enforcement Contact Not Resulting in a Referral to Another Agency” (Added 3/14)
  • JDF 325 – “Notice of Hearing on Petition for Expungement of Records for a Law Enforcement Contact Not Resulting in a Referral to Another Agency” (Added 3/14)
  • JDF 326 – “Order of Expungement of Records for a Law Enforcement Contact Not Resulting in a Referral to Another Agency” (Added 3/14)

Click here for all of State Judicial’s JDF forms.

Colorado Court of Appeals: No Error in Denial of Inmate’s Petition to Proceed In Forma Pauperis After Previous Frivolous Filings

The Colorado Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Farmer v. Raemisch, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Corrections on Thursday, January 2, 2014.

Inmate’s Civil Complaint—CRS § 13-17.5-102.7—Ineligibility to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fee—Denial of Access to Courts.

Plaintiff D. Thomas Farmer, a state inmate, filed a complaint alleging that unnamed prison employees had used excessive force against him, causing him various physical and psychological injuries. Farmer requested to proceed in forma pauperis—without prepaying the filing fee applicable to civil cases. The court determined that on three occasions, civil complaints filed by Farmer had been dismissed as frivolous, groundless, or malicious, or for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted, or because they sought monetary relief from persons immune from such liability. The district court denied Farmer’s request and dismissed his complaint for failing to pay a filing fee.

On appeal, Farmer argued that CRS § 13-17.5-102.7 violates his right to access to the courts as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. The Court of Appeals disagreed. Because each of Farmer’s previous complaints was dismissed for at least one reason expressly identified by § 13-17.5-102.7, each qualifies as a dismissal. The trial court therefore did not err in denying Farmer’s request to proceed in forma pauperis. The order was affirmed.

Summary and full case available here.

JDF Instruction Forms Revised in Several Categories by State Judicial

The Colorado State Judicial Branch revised several JDF instructions in July across several categories. Additionally, the Affidavit of Service form (JDF 98) was revised, which affects many categories.

NOTE: Forms in the Domestic Relations and Probate categories will be addressed separately.

Click the links below to download the forms, or visit the Colorado State Judicial Branch website.

ADOPTION

  • JDF 495 – Instructions for Second Parent Adoption (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 496 – Instructions for Adult Adoption (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 497 – Instructions for Validation of Foreign Adoption (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 498 – Instructions for Kinship Adoption (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 499 – Instructions for Custodial Adoption (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 500 – Instructions for Stepparent Adoption (revised 7/13)

APPEALS

  • JDF 126 – Instructions for Filing a County Court Civil or Small Claims Appeal (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 221 – Instructions for Filing a County Court Criminal Appeal (revised 7/13)

CRIMINAL

  • JDF 460I – Instructions to Discontinue Sex Offender Registration (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 476 – Instructions to Discontinue Sex Offender Registration Juvenile (revised 7/13)

EVICTIONS & FORECLOSURES

  • JDF 100 – Instructions for Forcible Entry & Detainer (FED)/Evictions (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 140 – Instructions for Mobile Home FED (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 620 – Instructions for Filing a Response to a Rule 120 Notice (revised 7/13)

GARNISHMENTS & JUDGMENTS

  • JDF 137 – Instructions to File a Foreign Judgment (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 82 – Instructions on How to Collect a Judgment and File Writ of Garnishment (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 112 – Instructions for Reviving a Judgment (revised 7/13)

MISCELLANEOUS

  • JDF 122 – Instructions for Issuance of Contempt Citation (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 86 – Instructions for Issuing an Out-of-State Subpoena (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 79 – Instructions for Issuing a Subpoena (revised 7/13)

MONEY CASES

  • JDF 110 – Instructions for County Court Civil Cases (Money Demand) (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 96 – Instructions for Filing an Answer and/or Counterclaim (revised  7/13)
  • JDF 248 – Small Claims Instructions (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 251 – Notice, Claim, and Summons to Appear for Trial (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 122 – Instructions for Issuance of Contempt Citation (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 137 – Instructions for Filing a Foreign Judgment (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 79  – Instructions for Issuing a Subpoena (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 131 – Instructions for an Agistor’s Lien (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 115  – Instructions for Replevin (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 112 – Instructions for Reviving a Judgment (revised 7/13)

NAME CHANGE

  • JDF 432 – Instructions for Filing a Change of Name – Adult (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 420 – Instructions for Filing a Change of Name – Minor (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 385 – Instructions for Filing a Change of Name to Obtain Identity Related Documents (revised 7/13)

PROTECTION ORDERS

  • JDF 400 – Instructions for Obtaining a Protection Order (revised 7/13)

SEALING CASES

  • JDF 323 – Instructions to File a Petition to Seal Underage Alcohol Conviction (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 416 – Instructions to File a Petition to Seal Arrest and Criminal Records (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 611 – Instruction to Seal Criminal Conviction Records (revised 7/13)

SMALL CLAIMS

  • JDF 248 – Small Claims Instructions (revised 7/13)
  • JDF 251 – Notice, Claim, and Summons to Appear for Trial (revised 7/13)

Colorado Supreme Court: Dismissal of Defendant’s Petition for Postconviction Relief Based on Opposing Motion from Defendant’s Own Counsel Improper

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dooly v. People on Monday, June 10, 2013.

Post-conviction Relief—Crim.P. 35(c)—Crim.P. 12(a)—Ineffective Assistance of Counsel.

Defendant Joshua Dooly sought review of the court of appeals’ judgment in People v. Dooly (No. 10CA1751), which affirmed the district court’s dismissal of his application for post-conviction relief pursuant to Crim.P. 35(c). The district court denied Dooly’s request for new counsel and instead granted his existing counsel’s motion to dismiss his application altogether, on the ground that the issues it raised failed to state a claim and therefore were without arguable merit. The court of appeals upheld the district court’s order of dismissal, reasoning that Crim.P. 12(a) provides for a motion to dismiss an application for post-conviction relief, and that the public defender, as Dooly’s counsel of record, could file motions on behalf of his client, including a motion to dismiss his client’s application for relief from his convictions despite being in clear contravention of his client’s wishes.

Every person convicted of a crime is provided a statutory right to make application for post-conviction relief and is entitled to a prompt review and ruling on any motion substantially complying with Form 4 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, the district court erred in granting the motion to dismiss against defendant’s wishes. The judgment of the court of appeals was reversed with instructions to order that defendant’s application for post-conviction relief be reinstated.

Summary and full case available here.

Tenth Circuit: Conviction is Final For Purposes of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b) When No Longer Subject to Direct Appeal

The Tenth Circuit published its opinion in United States v. Holyfield on Tuesday, January 8, 2013.

In 2002, Christopher Holyfield was convicted of drug charges, a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and sentenced to a mandatory term of life in prison because he had two prior felony convictions. Holyfield filed a § 2255 motion asserting his appellate counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to argue his 1998 California conviction was not final at the time Holyfield committed the instant violation of § 841(a)(1). The district court denied his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion for relief from judgment.

Holyfield was given probation when convicted of the 1998 charge. Under California law, an order granting probation is considered a final judgment for purposes of appeal. Holyfield failed to appeal that conviction within 60 days so when Holyfield violated § 841 after that time period, the 1998 conviction was no longer subject to examination on direct appeal. Thus, Holyfield committed a violation of § 841 after his 1998 conviction became final. The Tenth Circuit affirmed the denial of Holyfield’s § 2255 motion.

Colorado State Judicial Branch Revises Appeals, Miscellaneous, and Seal My Case Forms

The Colorado State Judicial Branch released several revised forms in the categories of Appeals, Miscellaneous, and Seal My Case in late December and early January. Many of the forms pertained to juvenile proceedings, including dependency & neglect appeals and sealing underage convictions.

Most forms are available in Adobe Acrobat (PDF) and Microsoft Word formats; many are also available as Word and Excel templates. Download the new form from State Judicial’s individual forms pages, or below.

APPEALS

  • Form 6 – “Certificate of Compliance” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 545 – “Notice of Appeal (Cross-Appeal) and Designation of Record” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 546 – “Certificate of Diligent Search” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 547 – “Supplemental Designation of Record” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 548 – “Petition on Appeal” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 549 – “Response to Petition on Appeal (Cross-Appeal)” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 640 – “Notice of Limited Appearance of Attorney With Consent of Pro Se Party Under C.A.R. 5 in an Appellate Matter” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 641 – “Consent to Limit Appearance by An Attorney Under C.A.R. 5” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 642 – “Notice of Completion of Limited Appearance Under C.A.R. 5 in an Appellate Matter” (revised 12/12)

SEAL MY CASE

  • JDF 304 – “Order of Expungement of Records Juvenile or Criminal Case” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 314  – “Order to Seal Pursuant to § 18-13-122(10), C.R.S.” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 418 – “Order to Seal Arrest and Criminal Records Pursuant to § 24-72-308, C.R.S.” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 419 – “Order and Notice of Hearing (Sealing of Records)” (revised 12/12)
  • JDF 615 – “Order to Seal Criminal Conviction Records for Offenses Involving  Controlled Substances Pursuant to § 24-72-308.5, C.R.S.” (revised 12/12)

MISCELLANEOUS

  • JDF 79 – “Instructions for Issuing a Subpoena” (revised 1/13)
  • JDF 80 – “District Court Subpoena to Attend, Attend and Produce, or Produce” (revised 1/13)
  • JDF 80.1 – “Notice to Subpoena Recipients” (issued 1/13)
  • JDF 80.2 – “County Court Subpoena to Attend or Attend and Produce” (issued 1/13)

All of State Judicial’s forms may be found here.

 

Tenth Circuit: Debtor May Not Appeal from Bankruptcy Court to Both Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) and District Court

The Tenth Circuit issued its opinion in Woodman v. Concept Construction on Thursday, October 25, 2012.

Mr. and Mrs. Woodman filed for bankruptcy in 2008. On December 1, 2009, the bankruptcy court ruled that Peter Woodman owed Concept Construction, his former employer, over $600,000, a debt not dischargeable in bankruptcy since it was obtained through embezzlement. Mr. Woodman filed two timely notices of appeal from this decision by the bankruptcy court.  One appeal was heard by the bankruptcy appellate panel (BAP), which dismissed the appeal a month later for failure to prosecute.  The other appeal was heard by the district court, which decided to consider the matter despite the prior BAP ruling, but ruled against Mr. Woodman on the merits.  Mr. Woodman appealed from the judgment of the district court.

Bankruptcy appellate panels were designed to provide an alternative, not a supplement, to an appeal to the district court. Nothing in the statutory language creating the panels suggests that Congress would tolerate the confusion and waste of resources that would result from simultaneous appeals of the same bankruptcy court decision to both the district court and a panel. To the contrary, the statute authorizing appeals from the bankruptcy court speaks in terms of alternatives, giving a party a choice—an election—between the two appellate forums.

Accordingly, The Tenth Circuit concluded that Mr. Woodman’s second notice of appeal to the district court was a nullity. He could not have filed a second appeal to the district court so long as he had a pending appeal before the BAP. His “Notice Voluntary Withdrawal of Appeal” did not comply with the bankruptcy rules.

Therefore, the district court did not have jurisdiction to review the decision of the bankruptcy court. The district court’s judgment is VACATED and the case is REMANDED to that court for dismissal of the appeal from the bankruptcy court.

State Judicial Revises Appellate, Garnishment, and Family Law Forms

The Colorado State Judicial Branch revised several forms in October in the appellate, garnishment, and family law categories. The appellate forms relate to an attorney’s limited appearance pursuant to the revisions to C.A.R. 5.

Most forms are available in Adobe Acrobat (PDF) and Microsoft Word formats; many are also available as Word and Excel templates. Download the new forms from State Judicial’s individual forms pages, or below.

APPEALS

  • JDF 640 – “Notice of Limited Appearance by Attorney with Consent of Pro Se Party Under C.A.R. 5” (Issued 10/12)
  • JDF 641 – “Consent to Limit Appearance by an Attorney Under C.A.R. 5” (Issued 10/12)
  • JDF 642 – “Notice of Completion of Limited Appearance Under C.A.R. 5” (Issued 10/12)

COUNTY CIVIL / DISTRICT CIVIL

  • Form 34 “Notice of Levy” (Revised 10/12) 
  • JDF 1338 – “Mandatory Disclosure” (Revised 10/12)

All of State Judicial’s forms may be found here.