July 18, 2019

Archives for February 6, 2012

Colorado Supreme Court: Juvenile Magistrate’s Suppression Order Must Be Reviewed or Adopted by District Court Before Appeal May Be Filed

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in People v. S.X.G. on February 6, 2012.

Interlocutory Appeals in Criminal Cases—Petitions for Review of Magistrate’s Order in Delinquency Cases—Interlocutory Appeals in Delinquency Cases.

In this juvenile delinquency case, the prosecution filed an interlocutory appeal under CRS §§19-2-903(2) and 16-12-102(2), and C.A.R. 4.1, seeking the Supreme Court’s review of a juvenile magistrate’s order suppressing certain statements made by a juvenile during a police interrogation. Because the juvenile magistrate’s suppression order never was reviewed or adopted (with or without modification) by the district court, as is required by CRS §19-1-108(5.5) and C.R.M. 7(a)(10)–(11) before an appeal may be filed, the Court lacked appellate jurisdiction under CRS §§19-2-903(2) and 16-12-102(2) to review the merits of the suppression ruling. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

Summary and full case available here.

Colorado Supreme Court: Colorado Courts Have No Authority to Enforce Civil Subpoenas Against Out-of-State Nonparties

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in In re Colorado Mills, LLC v. SunOpta Grains and Foods Inc. on February 6, 2012.

Court’s Authority to Enforce Arbitration Subpoenas Against Out-of-State Nonparties.

SunOpta Grains and Foods Inc. sought to enforce arbitration subpoenas against two out-of-state nonparties. The district court erred in enforcing those subpoenas.

The Supreme Court has long held that Colorado courts, as a matter of state sovereignty, have no authority to enforce civil subpoenas against out-of-state nonparties. Instead, such enforcement, if any, is left to the states in which the discovery is to take place. Accordingly, the Court vacated the district court’s enforcement order, made the rule absolute, and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings.

Summary and full case available here.

Tenth Circuit: No Opinions, 2/3/12

On Friday, February 3, 2012, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued no opinions.

SB 12-024: Residential Non-Profit Corporations — Open Meeting Provision Clarification and Limitation of Conditions Under Which Member Refunds Due

On January 11, 2012, Sen. Ted Harvey introduced SB 12-024 – Concerning the Obligations of a Residential Non-Profit Corporation to its Residential Members, and, In Connection Therewith, Clarifying Open Meeting Provisions and Limiting the Conditions Under Which the Corporation Must Refund Moneys Paid By a Residential Member. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill relieves a residential nonprofit corporation of its current obligations to:

  • Refund the entrance fee of a residential member within 90 days after the member’s resignation, termination, expulsion, or suspension from the corporation; and
  • Hold a member or his or her heirs harmless from liability for any periodic payments due more than 30 days after the member’s termination due to death or another reason beyond the member’s control.

This bill specifies that meetings of a committee of the board of directors that is not authorized to take final action on the board’s behalf are not subject to open meeting and published agenda requirements. The bill passed unamended from the Senate Local Government Committee; bill awaits 2nd Reading.

Since this summary, the bill has passed a second and third reading in the Senate unamended.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

SB 12-033: Adding Review of Near Fatalities and Egregious Abuse or Neglect to Child Fatality Review Team’s Responsibilities

On January 11, 2012, Sen. Lucia Guzman and Rep. Tom Massey introduced SB 12-033 – Concerning Adding Near Fatalities to the Responsibilities of the Department of Human Services Child Fatality Review Team. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill defines the terms “near fatalities” and “incidents of egregious abuse or neglect” and adds the review of those events to the responsibilities of the department of human services child fatality review team. Counties are required to notify the department of human services of any suspicious near fatality or incident of egregious abuse or neglect. The department is required to promulgate rules concerning confidential information for different types of incidents. On January 18, the Health and Human Services Committee amended the bill then moved it to the Senate for consideration on 2nd Reading.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

SB 12-032: Seeking Federal Waiver of Medicaid Eligibility Guidelines in Order to Allow Greater Flexibility and Efficiency

On January 11, 2012, Sen. Greg Brophy introduced SB 12-032 – Concerning Reforms to State-Administered Health Care Assistance Programs By Seeking Federal Authorization to Allow the State Greater Flexibility in the Management of the Programs. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill requires the department of health care policy and financing to seek a federal waiver to allow for increased flexibility and efficiency in the management of the Medicaid program and the children’s basic health plan.

The waiver will seek authorization to determine eligibility categories and income levels and to establish an asset test for eligibility, implement cost-sharing and premiums, encourage the use of private health benefits coverage, and encourage persons to maintain employer-sponsored health insurance. As part of the waiver, the state department may negotiate for capped federal reimbursements with provisions for adjustments in the federal reimbursements for population growth and inflation.

The state department shall report to the general assembly concerning the waiver request and identify necessary changes to state law to implement the reforms requested in the waiver. Assigned to the Health and Human Services Committee.

On February 1, this bill was postponed indefinitely by the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

SB 12-028: Further Placement of Offenders Adjudicated for Murder As Juveniles

On January 11, 2012, Sen. Kevin Grantham introduced SB 12-028 – Concerning Aggravated Juvenile Offenders Adjudicated for Murder. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

When a juvenile is adjudicated a delinquent for either murder in the first or second degree and adjudicated an aggravated juvenile offender, the court may sentence the juvenile consecutively or concurrently for all adjudicated offenses arising from the petition.

Under current law, an aggravated juvenile offender whose custody is transferred to the department of corrections is subject to the adult parole provisions. The bill sets the period of parole for an aggravated juvenile offender who was adjucated a delinquent for first degree murder at 20 years after the completion of his or her sentence.

Under current law, when an aggravated juvenile offender who is under the jurisdiction of the department of human services reaches 20 years and 6 months of age, the court conducts a hearing to determine the offender’s further placement. The bill requires the court to order a psychological evaluation before the hearing to determine if the juvenile is a danger to himself or herself or others. Assigned to the Judiciary Committee.

Since this summary, the bill was referred to the Appropriations Committee.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

SB 12-026: Prohibiting Agencies from Promulgating Rule to Create State Mandate on Local Government

On January 11, 2012, Sen. Bill Cadman introduced SB 12-026 – Concerning a State Agency Rule That Creates a State Mandate on a Local Government. This summary is published here courtesy of the Colorado Bar Association’s e-Legislative Report.

The bill prohibits an agency from promulgating a rule creating a state mandate on a local government unless:

  • The state mandate is specifically required by federal or state law;
  • The agency consults with local governments prior to promulgation of the rule; and
  • The state provides the funding necessary for the direct costs incurred by the local government in complying with the state mandate.

For each proposed rule that includes a state mandate, prior to filing a notice of proposed rule making with the secretary of state, an agency is required to provide information to the director of the office of state planning and budgeting relating to the rule and contact with local governments. The agency is prohibited from conducting a public hearing on the proposed rule unless it receives a written notice that the information complies with the law. The agency must include the information and the director’s notice in the agency rule-making record and provide copies of them to the executive committee of the legislative council.

An agency is also required to develop a process to actively solicit the input of elected officials and other representatives of local governments into the development of proposed rules affecting a local government.

The bill permits an agency to adopt a temporary or emergency rule without complying with these new requirements, but such compliance is required in order for the rule to become permanent. Assigned to the Local Government Committee.

Since this summary, the bill was referred to the Appropriations Committee.

Summaries of other featured bills can be found here.

Tenth Circuit: Unpublished Opinions, 2/2/12