August 23, 2019

Archives for January 2, 2014

Revised JDF Forms Available in Family, Adoption, Miscellaneous, and Other Categories

The Colorado State Judicial Branch continues to revise JDF forms. Several forms have been revised in December 2013 and January 2014. These include forms from the adoption, domestic, miscellaneous, money demand, name change, and other categories.

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


  • JDF 515 – “Motion to Waive Family Assessment/Home Study” (R12/13)
  • JDF 520 – “Petition to Terminate the Parent-Child Legal Relationship” (R12/13)


  • JDF 211 – “Motion to Reduce Payment for ODR Services and Supporting Financial Affidavit” (R12/13)
  • JDF 1115 – “Separation Agreement (Marriage)” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1201 – “Affidavit for Decree Without Appearance of Parties (Marriage)” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1215 – “Evaluation of a Foreign Decree” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1256 – “Separation Agreement (Civil Union)” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1258 – “Affidavit for Decree Without Appearance of Parties (Civil Union)” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1820M – “Worksheet A – Child Support Obligation: Sole Physical Care” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1821M – “Worksheet A – Child Support Obligation: Shared Physical Care” (R1/14)
  • JDF 1822 – “Instructions for Completing Child Support Worksheets” (R1/14)


  • JDF 91 – “Motion for Entry of Judgment on Stipulation” (R12/13)


  • JDF 82 – “Instructions for Collecting a Judgment and Completing a Writ of Garnishment” (R12/13)


  • JDF 35 – “Application for Administrative Relief from Federal Firearms Prohibitions” (12/13)
  • JDF 36 – “Petition for Relief Pursuant to § 13-5-142.5 or § 13-9-124 from Federal Firearms Prohibitions” (12/13)
  • JDF 37 – “Order for Relief from Federal Firearms Prohibitions” (12/13)


  • JDF 91 – “Motion for Entry of Judgment on Stipulation” (R12/13)
  • JDF 601 – “District Court Civil Cover Sheet” (R12/13)
  • JDF 603 – “Instructions to Complete District Court Civil Cover Sheet” (R12/13)


  • JDF 420 – “Instructions for Filing for a Change of Name – Minor” (R12/13)
  • JDF 432 – “Instructions for Filing a Change of Name – Adult” (R12/13)


  • JDF 417 – “Petition to Seal Arrest and Criminal Records Other Than Convictions” (R12/13)

For all of State Judicial’s JDF forms, click here.

Colorado Court of Appeals: Announcement Sheet, 1/2/14

On Thursday, January 2, 2014, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued five published opinions and no unpublished opinions.

First Citizens Bank & Trust Co. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co.

Maxwell v. United Services Automobile Association

Farmer v. Raemisch

In re Marriage of de Koning

Maralex Resources, Inc. v. Chamberlain

Summaries for these cases are forthcoming, courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Neither State Judicial nor the Colorado Bar Association provides case summaries for unpublished appellate opinions. The case announcement sheet is available here.

Andrew McCallin Appointed to Bench in Second Judicial District

On Tuesday, December 31, 2013, Governor Hickenlooper’s office announced his appointment of Andrew McCallin to the Second Judicial District Court. He will fill a vacancy created by the appointment of Hon. William Hood, III, to the Colorado Supreme Court, effective January 10, 2014.

Currently, Mr. McCallin is a First Assistant Attorney General in the consumer protection division of the Colorado Attorney General’s office. He is also an adjunct professor at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law. Prior to his work at the Colorado Attorney General’s office, Mr. McCallin was an associate at Rothgerber Johnson & Lyons in the complex commercial litigation section. He received his undergraduate degree from Claremont McKenna College and his J.D. from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law.

Governor Hickenlooper also appointed Kraig Ecton of Fort Collins to the Larimer County Court bench, effective December 31, 2013. He will fill a vacancy created by the retirement of Hon. Christine Carney. Prior to the appointment, Ecton worked for the Fort Collins City Attorney’s Office, practicing municipal law in the areas of police services, municipal court management, prosecution, information systems, and real estate. He has also taught at Colorado State University and been a Deputy District Attorney in the Eighth Judicial District. He received his bachelor’s degree from Colorado College, his J.D. from the University of Colorado School of Law, and an M.B.A. from Colorado State University.

Non-Attorney Appointments to Judicial Nominating Commissions Announced

On Tuesday, December 31, 2013, Governor Hickenlooper’s office announced the governor’s appointments to several of the state’s judicial nominating commissions.

The judicial nominating commissions are responsible for interviewing applicants for judicial vacancies and selecting three of the applicants as nominees for appointment to the judiciary. The governor then has 15 days in which to appoint one of the three nominees to the bench. If the governor fails to appoint a nominee within this time, the Chief Justice of the Colorado Supreme Court may select a nominee.

Each judicial district has a nominating commission comprised of seven citizen members who must reside in the judicial district. No more than four members may have the same political party affiliation, and at least four members must not be admitted to practice law in Colorado. Additionally, there is a Supreme Court Nominating Commission, responsible for nominating appointees for the Colorado Court of Appeals and Colorado Supreme Court. The Supreme Court Nominating Commission comprises one attorney and one non-attorney member from each of Colorado’s seven judicial congressional districts, with one additional non-attorney member.

Tuesday’s appointments are as follows:

  • First Judicial District Nominating Commission – Marie Belew Wheatley of Lakewood to serve as a non-attorney and a Democrat from Jefferson County.
  • Sixth Judicial District Nominating Commission – Kim Martin of Hesperus to serve as a non-attorney and a Democrat from La Plata County.
  • Ninth Judicial District Nominating Commission – David Fiore of Basalt to serve as a non-attorney and a Republican from Pitkin County.
  • Tenth Judicial District Nominating Commission – Sharon Swerdfeger of Pueblo West to serve as a non-attorney and a Republican from Pueblo County.
  • Twelfth Judicial District Nominating Commission – Carla Gomez of Center to serve as a non-attorney and a Republican from Saguache County.
  • Thirteenth Judicial District Nominating Commission – Brigitte Shafer of Akron to serve as a non-attorney and a Democrat from Washington County.
  • Fifteenth Judicial District Nominating Commission – Marlin Miller of Eads to serve as a non-attorney and a Republican from Kiowa County.
  • Sixteenth Judicial District Nominating Commission – Robert Stwalley of Las Animas to serve as an unaffiliated non-attorney from Bent County; Dwight Gardner of Ordway to serve as a non-attorney and a Democrat from Crowley County.
  • Seventeenth Judicial District Nominating Commission – Linda Rodriguez of Broomfield to serve as a n0n-attorney and a Democrat from Broomfield County.
  • Twentieth Judicial District Nominating Commission – Karla Rikansrud of Boulder to serve as a non-attorney and a Democrat from Boulder County.
  • Twenty-First Judicial District Nominating Commission – Eric Sandstrom of Grand Junction to serve as a non-attorney and a Democrat from Mesa County.
  • Supreme Court Nominating Commission – Robert Scott of Pagosa Springs to serve as a non-attorney and a Republican from the Third Congressional District; James Carpenter of Englewood to serve as a non-attorney and a Democrat from the Sixth Congressional District; and Connie McArthur of Denver to serve as a non-attorney and a Democrat at-large member.

Tenth Circuit: Jury Tampering Habeas Claim Remanded for Remmer Hearing

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals published its opinion in Stouffer v. Trammell on Thursday, December 26, 2013.

An Oklahoma state court jury convicted Bigler Jobe “Bud” Stouffer of first degree murder of one victim and shooting with intent to kill another victim. The jury sentenced him to death for the murder and to 100 years imprisonment for the shooting. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (“OCCA”) affirmed on direct appeal and denied post-conviction relief. Stouffer sought habeas relief in federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his conviction and death sentence on nine grounds. The district court denied relief but granted a certificate of appealability (“COA”) on four grounds: (1) jury tampering, (2) prosecutorial misconduct, (3) victim impact testimony, and (4) cumulative error.

The Tenth Circuit first analyzed the jury tampering claim. During the penalty phase of the trial, defense counsel noticed the husband of a juror, Stacey Vetter, in the courtroom. The husband was “‘laughing, joking, handshaking, and embracing’ with a former roommate of shooting victim Doug Ivens. The roommate was sitting with Mr. Ivens’s family.” Defense counsel asked to question the Vetters as to whether they had communicated about the case. Mr. Vetter had left the building, so counsel questioned a sheriff’s deputy who had observed repeated non-verbal communications between Mr. Vetter and his wife. The judge refused a request for mistrial, saying the defense had produced only speculation. The judge did not address counsel’s request for more investigation.

The Tenth Circuit held that the Vetters’ courtroom communications were improper and the trial court and OCCA failed to adequately investigate the communications. Because the trial court was apprised of the fact that an extrinsic influence may have tainted the trial, the proper remedy was a Remmer hearing to determine the circumstances of the improper contact and the extent of the prejudice, if any, to the defendant. The court also held that the federal district court erred in conduct a harmlessness analysis without holding an evidentiary hearing.

The Tenth Circuit affirmed denial of relief on the grounds of prosecutorial misconduct, victim impact testimony and cumulative error. The court reversed the district court’s holding that the improper external juror communication was harmless and remanded to the district court to conduct a Remmer hearing to determine whether this improper communication influenced the jury.

Tenth Circuit: Immigration Removal Decision Upheld

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals published its opinion in Maatougui v. Holder on Thursday, December 26, 2013.

An immigration judge found Nadia Maatougui removable for marriage fraud in 2004. Maatougui, a native and citizen of Morocco who has lived in the United States since 2000, then requested asylum and four other forms of relief from removal. In a written decision in 2009, the IJ denied the requests, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. Maatougui petitioned for review.

Maatougui claimed the IJ and BIA erred in denying her a hardship waiver and cancellation of removal based on their credibility determinations and the weight they gave the evidence in her case. The Tenth Circuit held it did not have jurisdiction to overturn their credibility determinations or evidence weighing so could not grant relief on that claim.

Maatougui also claimed that changed conditions in Morocco and the ineffective assistance of her prior counsel at a hearing in 2004 merited reopening her case. She failed to present new, material, previously unavailable evidence that justified reopening her case. The BIA’s decision was not insufficient under the circumstances.

The court also held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in declining to consider the ineffective assistance claim after Maatougui waited over six years to raise it. The court dismissed the first claim (decision on removability) for lack of jurisdiction and denied the petition to review the BIA’s denial of her motion to reopen her case.