August 24, 2019

Archives for June 22, 2017

Jin Ho Pack Appointed to Delta County Court

On Tuesday, June 20, 2017, the governor appointed Jin Ho Pack to the Delta County Court in the 7th Judicial District. Pack will fill a vacancy created by the retirement of Hon. Sandra Miller, effective August 4, 2017.

Pack is currently the county attorney for Delta County. She has been with the Delta County Attorney’s Office since 2014. Prior to her work for Delta County, Pack was an associate at Kaplan Law, L.L.C.; a child support enforcement attorney for Young Williams Child Support Services, and a deputy prosecuting attorney in Honolulu, Hawaii. Pack received her undergraduate degree from Duke University and her law degree from the University of Miami School of Law.

For more information about the appointment, click here.

Colorado Supreme Court: Self-Defense is Not Affirmative Defense to All Crimes Requiring Intent, Knowledge, or Willfulness

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in Roberts v. People on Monday, June 19, 2017.

Affirmative Defenses—Traverses—Self-Defense—Harassment.

In this case, the supreme court reviewed the district court’s order affirming petitioner’s county court conviction for harassment. Petitioner asserted that pursuant to People v. Pickering, 276 P.3d 553 (Colo. 2011), self-defense is an affirmative defense to all crimes requiring intent, knowledge, or willfulness. She thus contended that (1) she was entitled to a self-defense affirmative defense instruction to the specific intent crime of harassment, and (2) the county court’s refusal to give such an instruction constituted reversible error. Because Pickering does not establish the broad, bright-line rule that petitioner asserts and thus does not require a trial court to give a self-defense affirmative defense instruction in every case requiring intent, knowledge, or willfulness, the court affirmed the district court’s judgment.

Summary provided courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Colorado Supreme Court: Public Utilities Commission Properly Imposed Tariff After Billing Error

The Colorado Supreme Court issued its opinion in Carestream Health, Inc. v. Colorado Public Utilities Commission on Monday, June 19, 2017.

Public Utilities—Tariffs—Standing—Injury-in-Fact.

In this appeal, the supreme court considered two issues from the district court’s review of a decision of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission. Both issues pertain to a billing error that led Public Service Company of Colorado to undercharge Carestream Health, Inc. for gas it received over the course of a three-year period. The first issue is whether the Commission properly interpreted Public Service’s tariff, specifically the requirement to “exercise all reasonable means” to prevent billing errors. The court concluded that determining what means are “reasonable,” as that term is used in the tariff, necessarily requires considering what errors are foreseeable. The court therefore held that the Commission properly interpreted the tariff and acted pursuant to its authority. The second issue is whether Carestream had standing to challenge Public Service’s use of its tariff to recover a portion of the undercharge from its general customer base. Because Carestream suffered no injury from that action, it lacks standing to challenge it. The court accordingly affirmed the district court’s judgment.

Summary provided courtesy of The Colorado Lawyer.

Colorado Court of Appeals: Announcement Sheet, 6/22/2017

On Thursday, June 22, 2017, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued no published opinion and 23 unpublished opinions.

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

Tenth Circuit: Unpublished Opinions, 6/21/2017

On Wednesday, June 21, 2017, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued one published opinion and six unpublished opinions.

Pauly v. Vasquez

United States v. Hsu

United States v. Ortiz Fernandez

United States v. Rabieh

Collins v. Bear

United States v. Ramirez

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