May 01, 2017
2017 CO 37. No. 13SC791. Romero v. People.
Criminal Law—Expert Testimony—Jury Access to Exhibits.
This case required the Supreme Court to address two issues it recently addressed in two other cases, People v. Jefferson, 2017 CO 35, and Venalonzo v. People, 2017 CO 9. Specifically, the Court resolved (1) whether a trial court commits plain error when it fails to limit, sua sponte, a jury’s access to recorded statements during jury deliberations, and (2) whether a trial court abuses its discretion when it allows a police officer to testify as a lay witness about the concept of grooming in the context of sexual predation. The Court held that a trial court does not commit plain error when it does not limit a jury’s access to recorded statements without an objection, and that a trial court abuses its discretion when it allows a witness to testify about grooming without qualifying that witness as an expert. The Court therefore reversed defendant’s convictions and remanded the case for a new trial.
2017 CO 38. No. 15SC513. McShane v. Stirling Ranch Property Owners Association, Inc.
Exemption from Liability—Exculpatory Contracts— Corporation as Distinct Entity—Corporate Actions through Agents—Vicarious Liability.
The Supreme Court addressed whether a homeowners association may benefit from exculpatory clauses in the community’s declaration and bylaws when those clauses do not name the association as a protected party. Because the plain language of the exculpatory clauses at issue in this case does not limit the association’s liability, and the association, as an entity distinct from internal boards acting as its agents, cannot benefit from exculpatory clauses protecting those agents, the Court concluded that petitioners may bring their claims against the association. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals’ decision was reversed and the case was remanded.