Search



Not a CBA Member? Join Now!
Find A Lawyer Directory
Find A Lawyer Directory
STRATUM
Find A Lawyer Directory
Know Your Judge

TCL > September 2004 Issue > Court Business

September 2004       Vol. 33, No. 9       Page  135
From the Courts
Court Business

Court Business

Colorado Supreme Court Rules Committee

Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure
Chapter 20. Colorado Rules of Procedure Regarding
Attorney Discipline and Disability Proceedings, Colorado Attorneys’ Fund for Client Protection,
And Mandatory Continuing Legal Education and Judicial Education
Notice of Public Written Comment Regarding New Rule 260.8

Comments Due October 22, 2004

NOTICE OF PUBLIC WRITTEN COMMENT

The Colorado Supreme Court proposes to approve new Rule 260.8—Direct Representation and Mentoring in Pro Bono Civil Legal Matters, and new Form 8—Application for CLE Credit for Pro Bono Representation or Mentoring to the Rules of Procedure Regarding Attorney Discipline and Disability Proceedings, Colorado Attorneys’ Fund for Client Protection, and Mandatory Continuing Legal Education and Judicial Education. Anyone wishing to comment on the new proposed rule and form may do so in writing by submitting an original and eight copies to: Clerk of the Colorado Supreme Court, Susan J. Festag, 2 E. 14th Ave., Denver, CO 80203. Deadline is Friday, October 22, 2004, 5:00 p.m. If adopted by the Court, the Rule would become effective January 1, 2005.

By the Court:

Nancy E. Rice, Justice
Colorado Supreme Court

 

Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure
Chapter 20. Colorado Rules of Procedure Regarding
Attorney Discipline and Disability Proceedings, Colorado Attorneys’ Fund for Client Protection,
And Mandatory Continuing Legal Education and Judicial Education
Rule 260.8. (New) Direct Representation
and Mentoring in Pro Bono Civil Legal Matters

(1) A lawyer may be awarded a maximum of nine (9) units of general credit during each three-year compliance period for providing uncompensated pro bono legal representation to an indigent or near-indigent client or clients in a civil legal matter, or mentoring another lawyer or a law student providing such representation.

(2) To be eligible for units of general credit, the civil pro bono legal matter in which a lawyer provides representation must have been assigned to the lawyer by: a court; a bar association or Access to Justice Committee-sponsored program; an organized non-profit entity, such as Colorado Legal Services and Metro Volunteer Lawyers, whose purpose is or includes the provision of pro bono representation to indigent or near-indigent persons in civil legal matters; or a law school. Prior to assigning the matter, the assigning court, program, entity, or law school shall determine that the client is financially eligible for pro bono legal representation because (a) the client qualifies for participation in programs funded by the Legal Services Corporation, or (b) the client’s income and financial resources are slightly above the guidelines utilized by such programs, but the client nevertheless cannot afford counsel.

(3) Subject to the reporting and review requirements specified herein, (a) a lawyer providing uncompensated, pro bono legal representation shall receive one (1) unit of general credit for every five (5) billable-equivalent hours of representation provided to the indigent client; (b) a lawyer who acts as a mentor to another lawyer as specified in this Rule shall be awarded one (1) unit of general credit per completed matter; and (c) a lawyer who acts as a mentor to a law student shall be awarded two (2) units of general credit per completed matter. A lawyer will not be eligible to receive more than nine (9) units of general credit during any three-year compliance period via any combination of pro bono representation and mentoring.

(4) A lawyer wishing to receive general credit units under this Rule shall submit to the assigning court, program, or law school a completed Form 8. As to mentoring, the lawyer shall submit Form 8 only once, when the matter is fully completed. As to pro bono representation, if the representation will be concluded during a single three-year compliance period, then the lawyer shall complete and submit Form 8 only once, when the representation is fully completed. If the representation will continue into another three-year compliance period, then the applying lawyer may submit an interim Form 8 seeking such credit as the lawyer may be eligible to receive during the three-year compliance period that is coming to an end. Upon receipt of an interim or final Form 8, the assigning court, program, entity, or law school shall in turn report to the Board the number of general CLE units that it recommends be awarded to the reporting lawyer under the provisions of this Rule. It shall recommend an award of the full number of units for which the lawyer is eligible under the provisions of this Rule, unless it determines after review that such an award is not appropriate due to the lawyer’s lack of diligence or competence, in which case it shall recommend awarding less than the full number of units or no units. An outcome in the matter adverse to the client’s objectives or interests shall not result in any presumption that the lawyer’s representation or mentoring was not diligent or competent. The Board shall have final authority to issue or decline to issue units of credit to the lawyer providing representation or mentoring, subject to the other provisions of these Rules and Regulations, including without limitation the hearing provisions of Regulation 108.

(5) A lawyer who acts as a mentor to another lawyer providing representation shall be available to the lawyer providing representation for information and advice on all aspects of the legal matter, but will not be required to file or otherwise enter an appearance on behalf of the indigent client in any court. Mentors shall not be members of the same firm or in association with the lawyer providing representation to the indigent client.

(6) A lawyer who acts as a mentor to a law student who is eligible to practice law under CRS §§ 12-1-116 to -116.5 shall be assigned to the law student at the time of the assignment of the legal matter with the consent of the mentor, the law student, and the law school. The matter shall be assigned to the law student by a court, a program or entity as described in Rule 260.8(2), or an organized student law office program administered by his or her law school, after such court, program, entity, or student law office determines that the client is eligible for pro bono representation in accordance Rule 260.8(2). The mentor shall be available to the law student for information and advice on all aspects of the matter, and shall directly and actively supervise the law student while allowing the law student to provide representation to the client. The mentor shall file or enter an appearance along with the law student in any legal matter pursued or defended for the client in any court. Mentors may be acting as full-time or adjunct professors at the law student’s law school at the same time they serve as mentors, so long as it is not a primary, paid responsibility of that professor to administer the student law office and supervise its law-student participants.

(7) This Rule 260.8 shall expire on _____________, 20___ [five years from Rule’s adoption], unless extended by the Colorado Supreme Court.

 

Form 8—Application for CLE Credit for
Pro Bono Representation or Mentoring
Instructions

1. The lawyer who performed the representation or mentoring must complete Part I of this form, and then provide the original to the assigning court, program, entity, or law school.

2. The assigning court, program, entity, or law school must complete Part II of this form, and then submit the original to the Colorado Board of Continuing Legal and Judicial Education, 600 17th St., Suite 520-S, Denver, CO 80202-5451.

Report by Attorney Providing Pro Bono Representation or Mentoring Pursuant to C.R.Civ.P. 260.8.

Type of Report:

This is an  Interim or a  Final Application for credit, in accordance with the provisions of C.R.Civ.P. 260.8(4).

Case Information:

Attorney: _____________________________________________________________________________________

Client: _____________________________________________________________________________________

Name of Mentee Lawyer/Law Student (if applicable): _________________________________________________________________

Assigning Court, Program, Entity, or Law School (C.R.Civ.P. 260.8(2)): __________________________________________________

Type of Case (check major category):

Family law—Divorce Consumer contracts or debt Immigration Tax

Family law—Post-Decree matters Estate planning Landlord-tenant Tort defense

Bankruptcy Guardianship/conservatorship Probate Real estate

Other (explain) ________________________

Check Major Reason Case Closed (Complete Only if This is a Final Report):

Counsel and advice Change in client’s financial eligibility Insufficient merit to proceed

Brief service Negotiated settlement without legal action Administrative agency decision

Referred after legal assessment Negotiated settlement with legal action Court decision

Client did not respond or otherwise withdrew Other (explain) ______________________________________________

Brief Summary of Case Status (Interim Report) or Disposition (Final Report):

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Total Billable-Equivalent Pro Bono Hours spent providing direct representation ___________ OR mentoring ___________.

General CLE Units Requested (For pro bono representation, you may request one (1) general CLE unit for every five (5) billable-equivalent hours. For pro bono mentoring, you may request one (1) unit for a completed matter in which you mentored another lawyer, or two (2) units for a completed matter in which you mentored a law student. You may not apply for or receive more than nine (9) general units in a three-year compliance period for any combination of pro bono representation or mentoring): _____________.

I want to remain anonymous in the event that public recognition is given to attorneys for pro bono/reduced fee work:

 YES  NO

Comments about any aspect of the matter, the referring entity’s administration of it, etc.:

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Attorney’s Signature ________________________________________ Date ______________________________________________

Print Last Name ____________________________________________ Colorado Bar Reg. No. _______________________________

Report by Court, Program, Entity, or Law School that Assigned the Pro Bono Matter to the Reporting Lawyer Pursuant to C.R.Civ.P. 260.8.

Information Regarding Assigning Party:

Name of judge, court, program, entity, or law school: ___________________________________________________________

Name and title of person completing this form: ________________________________________________________________

Confirmation of Assignment:

Did your court/program/entity/law school assign the above-reported matter to the reporting lawyer for pro bono representation or mentoring?  YES  NO

If yes, what was the date of assignment? _____________________________________________________________________

Determination of Financial Eligibility:

Prior to assigning the matter to the reporting lawyer, did your organization determine that the client was eligible for pro bono representation in accordance with C.R.Civ.P. 260.8(2)?  YES  NO

Reporting Lawyer/Mentor Competence and Diligence:

Is it your conclusion after review that the reporting lawyer/mentor should receive an award of the full number of credit units to which s/he would ordinarily be entitled under C.R.Civ.P.260.8?  YES  NO

If no, explain why not: _____________________________________________________________________________________

Recommendation to Board of Continuing Legal and Judicial Education:

We, the assigning court, program, entity, or law school hereby recommend that the reporting lawyer receive _____________ general CLE units for his/her provision of pro bono representation or mentoring in this matter. (If the number of units you recommend is less than the number of units for which the reporting lawyer would ordinarily be eligible under C.R.Civ.P. 260.8, explain the basis for your recommendation in your response to Part II.D., above.)

For the assigning court, program, entity, or law school:

Signature _____________________________________________________________________________________

Print name: _____________________________________________________________________________________

Title: _____________________________________________________________________________________

Date: _____________________________________________________________________________________

Rule Change 2004(15)
Colorado Water Court Rules
Chapter 36. Uniform Local Rules For All State Water Court Divisions
Water Court Rules 2, 3, and 12
Amended and Adopted

Rule 2. Filing and Service Procedure

(a)–(f) [No Change]
(g) C.R.C.P. 121, section 1-26, electronic filing, applies to water court filings made electronically.

Rule 3. Applications for Water Rights

(a)–(d)(2) [No Change]
(d)(3) Every application shall state the name and address of the owner or reputed owner of the land upon which any new diversion or storage structure or modification to any existing diversion or storage structure is or will be constructed, or upon which water is or will be stored, including any modification to the existing storage pool. The applicant may rely upon the real estate records of the county assessor for the county or counties in which the land is located to determine the owner or reputed owner of potentially affected land.
(d)(4)–(e)(2) [No Change]

Rule 12. Modification of Rules

The requirements of these rules may be modified with approval of the water court upon agreement of the parties, or by the court, in exceptional cases to meet emergencies or to avoid substantial injustice or great hardship. Any request for modification shall be presented to the judge before whom the case is pending and shall state in writing the grounds supporting it. The opposing party shall be given reasonable notice and an opportunity to contest the request in writing.

Amended and Adopted by the Court, En Banc, June 24, 2004. Effective July 1, 2004.

By the Court:

Gregory J. Hobbs, Jr.
Justice, Colorado Supreme Court

 

Rule Change 2004(14)
Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure
Chapter 23.5. Rules of Procedure for Judicial Bypass of
Parental Notification Requirements
Amended and Adopted

 

JDF 394 (New) Emergency Protection Order issued Pursuant to § 13-14-103, C.R.S.

JDF 398 Temporary Civil Protection Order Issued Pursuant to § 13-14-102, C.R.S.

JDF 399 Permanent Civil Protection Order Issued Pursuant to § 13-14-102, C.R.S.

JDF 437 Temporary Protection Order Pursuant to § 19-3-316, C.R.S. (Dependency and Neglect)

JDF 439 Temporary Protection Order Pursuant to § 14-10-108, C.R.S.

(JDF 437 and JDF 439 are discontinued due to the consolidation of HB 04-1305.)

Amended and adopted by the Court, En Banc, June 17, 2004. Effective July 1, 2004.

By the Court:

Nancy E. Rice
Justice, Colorado Supreme Court

 

Rule Change 2004(13)
Colorado Rules of Probate Procedure
Appendix A to Chapter 27, Colorado Probate Code Forms
Amended and Adopted

Forms in this Appendix are available from the Colorado Courts’ Web page: http://www.courts.state.co.us/"chs/court/"forms/selfhelp"center.htm.)

Form CPC 32-GRM GUARDIAN’S REPORT (Minor)

Amended and adopted by the Court, En Banc, June 17, 2004 effective July 1, 2004.

By the Court:

Nancy E. Rice
Justice, Colorado Supreme Court

 

Second Corrective Order to Rule Change 2004(2)
The Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure
Chapter 29. Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure
For All Courts of Record In Colorado
Adopted

Rule 35. Postconviction Remedies.

This Second Corrective Order is Adopted on June 25, 2004, nunc pro tunc January 29, 2004, effective July 1, 2004.

Justices Martinez and Bender would have included an exception for actual innocence in sections 35(a)(2) and 35(c)(3)(VII).

By the Court:

Alex J. Martinez
Justice, Colorado Supreme Court

Rule 35. Postconviction Remedies.

(a)–(b) [No Change]
(c)(1)–(c)(2) [No Change]
(c)(3) One who is aggrieved and claiming either a right to be released or to have a judgment of conviction set aside on one or more of the grounds enumerated in section (c)(2) of this Rule may file a motion in the court which imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence, or to make such order as necessary to correct a violation of his constitutional rights. The following procedures shall apply to the filing and hearing of such motions:

(I) Any motion filed outside of the time limits set forth in § 16-5-402, 6 C.R.S., shall allege facts which, if true, would establish one of the exceptions listed in § 16-5-402(2), 6 C.R.S.

(II) Any motion filed pro se shall be filed on Form 4, and any motion filed by an attorney shall substantially comply with and contain the information detailed in Form 4, Petition for Postconviction Relief Pursuant to Crim. P. 35(c). See Appendix to Chapter 29.

(c)(3)(III) [No Change]

(c)(3)(IV) The court shall promptly review all motions that substantially comply with Form 4, Petition for Postconviction Relief Pursuant to Crim. P. 35(c). In conducting this review, the court should consider, among other things, whether the motion is timely pursuant to § 16-5-402, whether it fails to state adequate factual or legal grounds for relief, whether it states legal grounds for relief that are not meritorious, whether it states factual grounds that, even if true, do not entitle the party to relief, and whether it states factual grounds that, if true, entitle the party to relief, but the files and records of the case show to the satisfaction of the court that the factual allegations are untrue. If the motion and the files and record of the case show to the satisfaction of the court that the defendant is not entitled to relief, the court shall enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law in denying the motion. The court shall complete its review within sixty days of filing or set a new date for completing its review and notify the parties of that date.

(V) If the court does not deny the motion under (IV) above, the court shall cause a complete copy of said motion to be served on the prosecuting attorney if one has not yet been served by counsel for the defendant. If the defendant has requested counsel be appointed in the motion, the court shall cause a complete copy of said motion to be served on the Public Defender. Within forty-five days, the Public Defender shall respond as to whether the Public Defender's Office intends to enter on behalf of the defendant pursuant to § 21-1-104(1)(b), 6 C.R.S. In such response, the Public Defender shall identify whether any conflict exists, request any additional time needed to investigate, and add any claims the Public Defender finds to have arguable merit. Upon receipt of the response of the Public Defender, or immediately if no counsel was requested by the defendant or if the defendant already has counsel, the court shall direct the prosecution to respond to the defendant's claims or request additional time to respond within thirty days and the defendant to reply to the prosecution’s response within twenty days. The prosecution has no duty to respond until so directed by the court. Thereafter, the court shall grant a prompt hearing on the motion unless, based on the pleadings, the court finds that it is appropriate to enter a ruling containing written findings of fact and conclusions of law. At the hearing, the court shall take whatever evidence is necessary for the disposition of the motion. The court shall enter written or oral findings either granting or denying relief within sixty days of the conclusion of the hearing or provide the parties a notice of the date by which the ruling will be issued.

If the court finds that defendant is entitled to postconviction relief, the court shall make such orders as may appear appropriate to restore a right which was violated, such as vacating and setting aside the judgment, imposing a new sentence, granting a new trial, or discharging the defendant. The court may stay its order for discharge of the defendant pending appellate court review of the order. If the court orders a new trial, and there are witnesses who have died or otherwise become unavailable, the transcript of testimony of such witnesses at the trial which resulted in the vacated sentence may be used at the new trial.

(c)(3)(VI)–(c)(3)(IX) [No Change]

 

Form 4. Petition for Postconviction Relief Pursuant to Crim. P. 35(c).

(1)–(7) [No Change]
(8)(a) [No Change]
(8)(b)(1)–(3) [No Change]
(8)(b)(4)–(7):

(4) That there exists evidence of material facts, not theretofore presented and heard, which, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, could not have been known to or learned by the defendant or his attorney prior to the submission of the issues to the court or jury, and which requires vacation of the conviction or sentence in the interest of justice.

(5) Any other ground otherwise properly the basis for collateral attack upon a criminal judgment.

(6) That the sentence imposed has been fully served or that there has been unlawful revocation of parole, probation, or conditional release.

For any box checked, YOU MUST attach a separate sheet of paper with the ground listed at the top of the page and number it accordingly, 8(a), 8(b)(1), 8(b)(2), 8(b)(3), 8(b)(4), 8(b)(5), 8(b)(6), and/or 8(b)(7). On each separate sheet of paper list each and every fact you feel supports that claim. Be specific and give details.

(9) [No Change]

SUCCESSIVE PETITIONS

Important Notice Regarding Additional Petitions:

With specific exceptions provided for in Criminal Procedure Rule 35(c)(3)(VII), the court shall deny any claim that could have been presented in an appeal or postconviction proceeding previously brought.

Therefore, all claims related to the conviction under attack in this petition must be listed in this petition, or future motions may be denied.

Wherefore, petitioner prays that the Court grant relief to which petitioner may be entitled in this proceeding.

________________________________________________________

Petitioner’s Original Signature

________________________________________________________

Petitioner’s Printed Name

________________________________________________________

Address

________________________________________________________

City, State, Zip Code

________________________________________________________

Phone Number

Supreme Court of Colorado
Office of the Chief Justice, Colorado Judicial Department
Chief Justice Directives

Notice of Availability

A full set of the Chief Justice Directives may be purchased from the Colorado Judicial Department for $15, which includes copying, handling, and postage costs. Checks should be made payable to Colorado Judicial Department and should be mailed to: Court Services Division, Office of the State Court Administrator, 1301 Pennsylvania St., Ste. 300, Denver, CO 80203. Individual Chief Justice Directives will be assessed a $5 charge, pursuant to Chief Justice Directive 96-01, concerning standard research fees. Complete Chief Justice Directives also are available from the Colorado Supreme Court homepage at: http://www. courts.state.co.us/supct/cjdirect/cjdirec"tives.htm.

Publication in The Colorado Lawyer

Chief Justice Directives will be published on a space available basis in this "Court Business" section of The Colorado Lawyer. For space reasons, attachments may be omitted. To obtain a copy of the complete Chief Justice Directives and attachments, contact the Court Services Division, Office of the State Court Administrator, 1301 Pennsylvania St., Ste. 300, Denver, CO 80203; or visit http://www.courts.state.co.us/"supct/cj"direct/cjdirec"tives.htm.

 

Directive establishing statewide probation priorities and their relationship to judicial district management practices; defining the authority of the Supreme Court to issue standards and guidelines for the administration of probation services; establishing authority and scope of contract probation services; and defining the role and responsibilities of the probation program review process, and the creation of the Probation Advisory Committee.

Probation services in Colorado promote public safety through the delivery of four basic functions:

• Pre-sentence investigation services to the courts;

• Supervision and services to offenders based upon "risk of re-offending";

• Victim notification and assistance; and

• Development of community programs in response to specific offender, community and victim needs.

Public safety concerns require that offender supervision resources be directed toward the highest risk offenders in the community. The State Court Administrator shall submit to the Supreme Court for approval standards and procedural guidelines for the administration of probation services, including any specialized programs mandated by the general assembly. Each district shall develop policies and procedures that assure the maximum efficiency and effectiveness of available probation resources. Such procedures shall emphasize compliance with established standards approved by the Supreme Court.

PART I. Investigation Services

Investigation services shall be governed by the four levels of priority established in Table 1. [Find Table 1 at website.]

Allocation of appropriated investigation staff resources shall be based upon the priority order of services. Resource limitation may prevent a district from providing all priority one services, as well as lesser priority investigations. Districts may develop a plan, subject to policies established in this directive, to: (1) modify the priorities when such modifications are determined necessary by the Chief Judge; and/or (2) utilize contract probation services to provide supplemental support to probation officers in conducting priority two and three investigations. Such plans shall be submitted to the State Court Administrator’s Office for review. The procedures for the use of contract probation services shall be as set forth in the Standards for Probation in Colorado, Standard 2.15

All evaluations or pre-sentence investigations, ordered under this Part I, shall include the application of screening and assessment instruments developed by the State Court Administrator’s Office.

A. District Court Investigations

District court investigation shall be provided in accordance with applicable law and Probation Standards, Section 5. Such standards provide for uniform assessment of offender risk, initial supervision planning and the evaluation of available sentencing options.

B. County Court Misdemeanor Investigations

Probation investigation resources are finite, limiting the availability of pre-sentence investigations in the county courts. In conjunction with the local probation department and other criminal justice agencies, the county courts may implement a screening and assessment procedure for priority 2 investigations, as set forth in Probation Standard 5-2.2. Such a process shall assist the court in determining referrals to the district probation department or to a contract probation provider. The initial screening and assessment procedure shall be administered by the sentencing court.

C. Domestic Violence Screening and Assessment

Domestic violence cases shall be initially screened, utilizing Probation Standard 5-2.2.

Domestic violence cases determined by the court to be a high risk for re-offending may be referred to the probation department for further evaluation or pre-sentence investigation.

D. Victim Impact Statements

Victim Impact Statements shall be included in pre-sentence reports pursuant to C.R.S. § 16-11-102. Probation departments shall consider the victim impact statement when developing an initial supervision plan recommended to the court. Initial supervision recommendation should incorporate measures to assure victim safety. Reference Probation Standards 4-6, 5-7, 5-8.

PART II. Supervision Services

Supervision of probationers shall be governed by the principle of "risk of re-offending." The level of supervision shall be established based upon the initial assessment and subsequent reassessments by the probation department. Probationers considered "high risk," irrespective of offense classification or court of sentence shall receive priority services, and be supervised in accordance with Probation Standard 4-6. Given limited resources, non-high-risk offenders, either felony or misdemeanor, and certain alcohol related offenders may be supervised by use of contract probation services, or other alternative means such as volunteer programs and administrative "banked" caseload approaches.

PART III. Supplemental Contract Probation Services

As provided in C.R.S. §§ 19-2-204(4)(a) and 18-1.3-202(2), districts may enter into agreements with public or private entities for the provision of probation services. Such agreements may be utilized for investigation services and the supervision of lower risk probationers except that, with approval of the sentencing court, cases involving an offender convicted of Driving Under the Influence, Driving While Ability Impaired, an offender meeting the statutory definition of "Persistent Drunk Driver" or any other case deemed appropriate by the sentencing court, may also be supervised by private probation instead of the district’s Alcohol and Drug Driving Safety Program (ADDS). In the event an offender with an alcohol related driving offense is supervised by private probation, the court shall sentence the offender to probation pursuant to C.R.S. §§ 18-1.3-202 and -204. Adult offenders and offenders with alcohol related driving offenses shall be ordered to pay supervision fees directly to the contract provider. For delinquency petitions under Title 19, juvenile offender services under this Part III shall be paid by the local probation department based upon available allocation. Procedures and contracting provision are set forth in Probation Standard 2-15 to 2-15.6.

PART IV. Victim Notification and Victim Services

Probation departments shall inform victims at critical stages of supervision as directed by CRS § 24-4.1-303. Additionally, departments may expand victim services through the creation of victim services coordinators. Such activities shall be conducted in cooperation with other local victim services programs. Reference Probation Standards 2-8, 2-19 to 2-19.4

PART V. Community Initiatives: Restorative Justice

Probation is urged to provide the public with opportunities for input regarding the criminal justice system, and to provide assistance, education and support for communities harmed by criminal actions.

A. Public Education: Probation departments are urged to provide ongoing education in restorative and community justice to probation staff and the community at large.

B. Community Services: Probation should establish services and sentencing options available to the court that specifically address restoring the community harmed by a criminal action. These services may require establishing working associations and cooperative lines of communication between agencies, non-profit organizations, criminal justice officials, and the public at large.

PART VI. Probation Performance Review

Performance reviews, developed by the Division of Probation Services, will address the performance of essential probation functions and practices (pre-sentence investigation/intake process; case planning; case management; specialized programs and issues). The Division of Probation Services will develop and submit an annual Performance Review plan. The purposes of the review are: (1) to aid each probation department in assessing performance and program operation in accordance with the prescribed priorities, standards, guidelines and the case classification and assessment system; (2) to provide assistance to each probation department in meeting the objectives of probation within the available resources; (3) to aid each probation department in assessing their own performance and assessing contracting activities with respect to the utilization of supplemental probation services; (4) to assist each probation department in complying with state probation standards, statutes, Chief Justice Directives, Judicial Branch and Judicial District policies, and any specialized programs mandated by the general assembly; and (5) to facilitate the development of best practices through the analysis of the performance review data and dissemination of this information on a state-wide basis.

PART VII. Probation Advisory Committee

In order to coordinate the probation function within the Judicial Branch, and to facilitate communications between the judges, probation staff and staff of the State Court Administrator’s Office the Probation Advisory Committee is created. The Probation Advisory Committee shall consist of 27 members appointed for a two-year term by the Chief Justice. The purposes of the Committee are: (1) to coordinate the activities of standing probation committees; (2) to initiate and review probation standards, policies and program development; (3) to serve as an advisory body to the State Court Administrator Office relating to probation policy; and, (4) to have its members serve as liaisons to their respective organizations. Membership shall include: one justice of the Supreme Court, four district court judges, one of whom shall be a chief judge serving as chair, two county court judges, four chief probation officers, four probation supervisors, four probation officers, one clerical position, one victim assistance coordinator, one ADDS Coordinator, one district administrator, one clerk of court, two public at large members, and the Director of the Division of Probation Services. The chair shall convene the committee a minimum of four times per year, and may establish sub-committees to perform the tasks deemed appropriate to carry out the responsibilities of the committee.

This directive rescinds CJD 02-02.

Dated April 20, 2004.

Mary J. Mullarkey
Chief Justice, Colorado Supreme Court

 

Chief Justice Directive 04-07
Access to Court Services and Programs for People with Disabilities
New Directive

This directive is issued to ensure equal access to and full participation in court and probation services and programs by people with disabilities, including attorneys, litigants, defendants, probationers, witnesses, victims, potential jurors, prospective employees and public observers of court proceedings.

1. Qualified people with disabilities shall not, by reason of their disability, be discriminated against, or be excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of services and programs conducted by the courts, including probation.

2. A person with a disability is defined as an individual who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities, has a record of such impairment or is regarded as having such impairment.

3. Upon notification by a person with a disability of the need for accommodation, the court shall, at no charge, provide reasonable accommodation that will enable the person to access and/or effectively participate in or enjoy the benefits of any court or probation service or program. This directive shall not apply to accommodations necessary for participation in services and programs that are not conducted by the courts, including court-ordered treatment and services provided or offered by treatment agencies or other providers.

4. The local administrative authority, with the assistance of the ADA coordinator, shall determine what reasonable accommodation will be made. Consultation shall occur with the individual to explore his or her limitations and the options available for accommodating the disability. Primary consideration shall be given to the requested accommodation; however, alternative accommodation may be offered if equally effective. The court or probation department is not required to make modifications that would fundamentally alter the service or program or cause undue financial or administrative burden.

5. With the exception of the appointment of an interpreter for a deaf or hard of hearing individual pursuant to section 13-90-204 (1), C.R.S., the Judicial Department shall provide and pay the reasonable costs of any necessary auxiliary aids or services, excluding devices of a personal nature, for the duration of the time period for which accommodation is needed. Examples of auxiliary aids or services of a personal nature not covered by this directive include prescription eyeglasses, hearing aids, wheelchairs, and/or personal medical or attendant care.

6. If accommodation is needed for an individual to serve on jury duty and a time constraint exists related to the availability of an accommodation, the court, at its discretion, may continue an individual's jury summons to allow the court time to provide the accommodation. Any accommodation shall be made for the duration of any jury trial on which the person needing the accommodation serves.

Approved by the Chief Justice.

Dated June 18, 2004.

 

Mary J. Mullarkey
Chief Justice, Colorado Supreme Court

 

U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado

Notice of Proposed Amendment to Local Rules
D.C.Colo.LCivR 40.1 and D.C.Colo.LCrR 50.1
Of the U.S. District for the District of Colorado
Comments Requested by September 30, 2004

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2071 and Rule 83 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado proposes to amend local rules D.C.COLO.LCivR 40.1 and D.C.COLO.LCrR 50.1 by substituting new language as stated below. Versions including strikeovers and redlined text may be accessed on the Court’s website, http://www.cod.uscourts.gov.

Comments on the proposed amendments are invited and should be submitted, in writing, to the Clerk of Court, 901 19th St., Denver, CO 80294. All comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m., September 30, 2004.

By the Court:

Gregory C. Langham
Clerk of the Court
U.S. District Court of Colorado

 

D.C.COLO.LCivR 40.1—ASSIGNMENT OF CASES

A. Assignment in General. Except as provided in this rule and in D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1 and 8.2, civil cases shall be assigned to judicial officers by random draw. Work parity shall be maintained among active district judges, provided that a majority of active district judges may adjust the assignment of cases to the Chief Judge as may be necessary for the performance of the duties of that office, and may, for good cause, approve special assignment or reassignment of cases among the judicial officers of the court. All other transfers of cases from one judicial officer to another shall be subject to the Chief Judge’s approval.

B. Random Draw by Computer. The clerk shall maintain a computerized program to assure random and public assignment of new cases on an equal basis among the judicial officers. A senior judge may decline assignment of cases and, on written notice to the Chief Judge, limit participation in the random draw by a stated percentage.

C. Special Assignment.

1. If the pro se plaintiff filing a new case already has a case pending or had a case terminated within 12 months of the new filing, the new case shall be assigned to the district judge who was assigned the earlier case.

2. Once a bankruptcy appeal or motion to withdraw the reference has been assigned to a district judge by random draw, any case subsequently filed concerning the same debtor in bankruptcy shall be assigned to the same district judge. The party filing the subsequent case shall notify the clerk in writing of the pending bankruptcy matter.

3. On filing a civil forfeiture proceeding, the United States Attorney shall notify the clerk in writing when a potential claimant is a defendant in a pending criminal case. The civil case shall be assigned to the judge to whom the criminal case was assigned.

4. A new case claimed to be related to a pending case shall be assigned to the same judicial officers only if the district judge assigned to the pending case grants a motion to consolidate pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P 42(a) and D.C.COLO. LCivR 42.1.

D. "AP" Cases. Upon the filing of any administrative agency or bankruptcy appeal, the clerk will assign a case number without random selection to a district judge designated by the Chief Judge. The case number shall bear the initials "AP" to identify it as an appeal. A separate listing of "AP" cases shall be maintained. The clerk shall confirm that the notice of appeal was timely filed or, in the case of administrative agency appeals, that final agency action is alleged. Judicial staff shall then set the case for a prebriefing conference before a judicial officer. Conference dates will be on a fixed schedule and judicial staff shall schedule each appeal. Notice advising counsel and any pro se party of the conference date shall describe the action to be taken at the prebriefing conference. During the pendency of the action, the clerk will docket all pleadings, briefs and orders, and will prepare the judgment in accordance with the court’s decision on appeal.

1. At the prebriefing conference, the judicial officer will determine whether the appeal can be resolved by stipulation, confession, or settlement. If not, the judicial officer will narrow the issues on appeal, refine the designation of record on appeal, and set the briefing schedule. Reference to Bankruptcy Rule 8009 shall be made in appropriate cases. The clerk shall attend each conference and prepare a minute order setting forth the schedule of further proceedings including the briefing schedule. If, in the opinion of the judicial officer, the appeal is filed for purposes of delay or other just cause appears, the judicial officer shall include in the minute order a notation that the appeal should be expedited, and the clerk shall stamp the word "EXPEDITE" on the face of both court file jackets.

2. The clerk shall monitor the "AP" docket and shall provide such reports and information as requested by the district judge assigned to administer cases filed pursuant to this rule.

3. The clerk shall refer any motions for extensions of time, for permission to exceed briefing limits, to supplement the record, to strike or impose sanctions, etc., to the district judge assigned to administer cases filed pursuant to this rule. When all briefs are filed and the appeal is at issue, the clerk will draw, using the automated random assignment procedure, a district judge to whom the case will be reassigned. The case will be renumbered, changing the "AP" designation to the assigned district judge’s identification initial(s), and the copy file will be delivered to that district judge. The clerk will advise counsel of record and any pro se party of this reassignment.

4. No scheduling order shall be prepared in cases governed by this subsection.

E. Recusal. Recusal of an active judicial officer shall be only by written order setting forth the reasons.

F. Adjustments. Upon recusal or special assignment of a case to a judge pursuant to this rule or D.C.COLO.LCivR 42.1, the clerk shall adjust the computerized drawing program to maintain the equal assignment of cases among active district judges

 

D.C.COLO.LCrR 50.1—ASSIGNMENT OF CASES

A. Assignment in General. Except as provided in this rule, criminal cases shall be assigned to judicial officers by random draw. Work parity shall be maintained among active district judges, provided that a majority of active district judges may adjust the assignment of cases to the Chief Judge as may be necessary for the performance of the duties of that office, and may, for good cause, approve special assignment or reassignment of cases among the judicial officers of the court. All other transfers of cases from one judicial officer to another shall be subject to the Chief Judge’s approval.

B. Random Draw by Computer. The clerk shall maintain a computerized program to assure random and public assignment of new cases on an equal basis among the judicial officers. A senior judge may decline assignment of cases and, on written notice to the Chief Judge, limit participation in the random draw by a stated percentage.

C. Special Assignments.

1. On filing a new criminal case, the United States Attorney shall notify the clerk in writing when that defendant is involved in a pending civil forfeiture proceeding. The criminal case shall be assigned to the judicial officer to whom the civil case was assigned.

2. On filing a new criminal case, the United States Attorney shall notify the clerk in writing when that defendant is serving a sentence of probation or supervised release imposed by a district judge currently serving on this court and the case shall be assigned to that judge.

D. Recusal. Recusal of a judicial officer shall be only by written order setting forth the reasons.

E. Adjustments. Upon recusal or special assignment of a case to a judge pursuant to this rule, the clerk shall adjust the computerized drawing program to maintain the equal assignment of cases among active district judges.

© 2004 The Colorado Lawyer and Colorado Bar Association. All Rights Reserved. Material from The Colorado Lawyer provided via this World Wide Web server is protected by the copyright laws of the United States and may not be reproduced in any way or medium without permission. This material also is subject to the disclaimers at http://www.cobar.org/tcl/disclaimer.cfm?year=2004.


Back