July 22, 2019

Archives for June 3, 2015

Felony DUI, Child Protection Ombudsman, and Foster Care Background Check Bills Signed

On Monday, June 1, and Tuesday, June 2, 2015, Governor Hickenlooper signed three bills into law. To date, the governor has signed 290 bills into law this legislative session. The bills signed Monday and Tuesday are summarized here.

  • HB 15-1043 – Concerning Penalties for DUI Offenders, and, in Connection Therewith, Making an Appropriation, by Reps. Lori Saine & Beth McCann and Sens. John Cooke & Michael Johnston. The bill increases the penalties for third offenses of DUI, DUI per se, and DWAI so that they are class 4 felonies.
  • SB 15-204 – Concerning the Independent Functioning of the Office of the Child Protection Ombudsman, and, in Connection Therewith, Making and Reducing Appropriations, by Sens. Linda Newell & Kevin Lundberg and Rep. Jonathan Singer. The bill moves the office for the child protection ombudsman from a nonprofit organization to the Judicial Department.
  • SB 15-087 – Concerning the Safe Placement of Children in Foster Care Homes, by Sen. Linda Newell and Rep. Jonathan Singer. The bill reorganizes existing statutes regarding foster care homes, adds definitions for kinship foster care, and adds requirements for background checks of kinship foster care homes.

For a complete list of Governor Hickenlooper’s 2015 legislative decisions, click here.

Colorado Supreme Court: Existing Two-Part Framework Sufficient to Evaluate Waiver of Counsel

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in People v. Davis on Monday, June 1, 2015.

Competency to Waive the Right to Counsel—Double Jeopardy—Merger.

The Supreme Court declined to adopt a new competency standard, pursuant to Indiana v. Edwards, 554 U.S. 164 (2008), for mentally ill defendants who wish to waive the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Accordingly, the Court reversed the court of appeals’ decision to adopt an Edwards standard. In addition, the Court held that double jeopardy and merger principles require the trial court to vacate Davis’s possession conviction because the evidence at trial did not support a finding, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Davis possessed a quantum of drugs different from the one he distributed to an undercover officer. As such, the Court reversed the court of appeals’ decision to uphold Davis’s possession conviction.

Summary and full case available here, courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Colorado Supreme Court: No New Competency Standard for Mentally Ill Defendants Who Waive Counsel

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in the consolidated cases of Wilson v. People and People v. Beaty on Monday, June 1, 2015.

Competency to Waive the Right to Counsel.

Relying on People v. Davis, 2015 CO 36 (released concurrently), the Supreme Court declined to adopt a new competency standard, pursuant to Indiana v. Edwards, 554 U.S. 164 (2008), for mentally ill defendants who wish to waive the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Therefore, the Court affirmed the judgments of the court of appeals in both Wilson and Beaty, because the court of appeals declined to adopt an Edwards standard in both cases.

Summary and full case available here, courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Colorado Supreme Court: Health Savings Account Not Retirement Account for Garnishment Exemption Purposes

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in Roup v. Commercial Research, LLC on Monday, June 1, 2015.

Health Savings Account—Statutory Exemptions From Garnishment—CRS § 13-54-102(1)(s).

In this decision, the Supreme Court held that a Health Savings Account (HSA) is not a “retirement plan” within the meaning of Colorado’s exemption statute. An HSA is not intended to replace income lost as a result of retirement; it is intended to cover medical costs incurred at any point during a person’s lifetime. The General Assembly has not chosen to provide an exemption for HSAs in the relevant statutes. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the judgment of the court of appeals.

Summary and full case available here, courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Colorado Supreme Court: Water Court’s Conditional Decree of Non-Consumptive Hydropower Right Affirmed

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in Concerning the Application for Water Rights of Tidd: Frees v. Tidd on Monday, June 1, 2015.

Ditch Easement—Dominant and Servient Interests—Alterations to a Ditch—Conditional Water Right for Non-Consumptive Hydropower Use—Declaratory Judgment and Conditional Water Right Decree With Conditions to Protect Against Injury to Ditch and Water Right Interests—Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969.

The Supreme Court upheld the water court’s judgment entering a conditional water right decree for a non-consumptive hydropower use water right with a 2010 priority for 0.41 cfs diverted from Garner Creek through the headgate of Garner Creek Ditch No. 1 in Saguache County, Water Division No. 3. Charles and Barbara Tidd properly obtained a judicial declaration of no material injury to ditch and water right interests owned by the Frees in connection with a ditch easement located on the Tidds’ property. The Court upheld the water court’s finding that water is available for the non-consumptive conditional appropriation under the terms of the Water Right Determination and Administration Act of 1969, and the conditions included in the water court’s judgment and decree were sufficient to protect against injury to senior adjudicated water rights and the Frees’ ditch rights.

Summary and full case available here, courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Tenth Circuit: Unpublished Opinions, 6/2/2015

On Tuesday, June 2, 2015, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued three published opinions and five unpublished opinions.

Martinez v. Mares

Valencia v. DeLuca

United States v. Cervantes-Valeriano

United States v. White

United States v. Maxwell

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