supreme court, state of colorado 9:00 a.m. oral … june...supreme court, state of colorado 10:00...

9:00 a.m.SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADOOral Argument: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 EN BANCBailiff:

2015SA330 (44 MINUTES)

Plaintiff-Appellant:

The People of the State of Colorado,

v.

Defendant-Appellee:

William Paul Simpson.

For the Plaintiff-Appellant The People of the State of Colorado:Jennifer GilbertRichard Harold OrmanGeorge Herbert BrauchlerOFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, 18TH J.D.

For the Defendant-Appellee William Paul Simpson:Elsa A. ArchambaultandLucienne Sahlin OhanianCOLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER

For Amici Curiae Colorado District Attorneys' Council and Office of the Denver District Attorney:Katherine A HansenDENVER DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

Appeal from the District Court, Arapahoe County, 2015CR212Docketed: December 14, 2015At Issue: April 15, 2016

ISSUE(S):

B000ctr

Text Box

Justice Márquez' Chambers

B000ctr

Text Box

Was the accurate advisement of Colorado's expressed consent statute Simpson received coercive as to render his subsequent consent to testing facially unconstitutional because it required that he make a choice?


2015SC340 (44 MINUTES)

Petitioner:

Daniel Fitzgerald,

v.

Respondent:

The People of the State of Colorado.

For the Petitioner Daniel Fitzgerald:Chip G. SchonebergerFOSTER GRAHAM MILSTEIN & CALISHER,andChristopher CarringtonRICHARDS CARRINGTON, LLC

For the Respondent The People of the State of Colorado:Jennifer GilbertGeorge Herbert BrauchlerOFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, 18TH J.D.

For Amicus Curiae Colorado Attorney General:L. Andrew CooperGlenn E. RoperOFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL For Amicus Curiae Colorado District Attorneys' Council:Donna Skinner Reed1ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT ATTORNEYandThomas R RaynesCOLORADO DISTRICT ATTORNEYS' COUNCIL For Amicus Curiae Mothers Against Drunk Driving:Pamela Beth MaassMichael Justin RosenbergTHE GOLD LAW FIRM LLC

Certiorari to the District Court, Arapahoe County, 2014CV31801Docketed: April 27, 2015At Issue: May 17, 2016

ISSUE(S):

[REFRAMED ISSUE] Whether the prosecution violated petitioner's rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution by offering at trial'as evidence of guilt'petitioner's election not to consent to a warrantless, chemical search of his body.

B000ctr

Text Box


B000ctr

Line



Plaintiff-Appellant:


v.

Defendant-Appellee:

Oliver Benton Hyde.

For the Plaintiff-Appellant The People of the State of Colorado:Jennifer GilbertGeorge Herbert BrauchlerOFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, 18TH J.D.

For the Defendant-Appellee Oliver Benton Hyde:Gregory Charles GrafGRAF & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

Appeal from the District Court, Arapahoe County, 2015CR1230Docketed: November 3, 2015At Issue: April 15, 2016

ISSUE(S):

B000ctr

Text Box


B000ctr

Text Box

Did the district court wrongly find that a statutorily authorized blood draw from an unconscious driver pursuant to Colorado's expressed consent statute is unconstitutional?

1:30 p.m.SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADOOral Argument: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 EN BANCBailiff:

2014SC938 (1 HOUR)

Petitioner:


v.

Respondent:

Heather Beauvais.

For the Petitioner The People of the State of Colorado:Kevin E. McReynoldsOFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

For the Respondent Heather Beauvais:Michelle Lee LazarLAW FIRM OF MICHELLE LAZAR

For Amicus Curiae Colorado Criminal Defense BarScott Adam MossMargaret Ann EnglandUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO LAW SCHOOL

Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2013CA665Docketed: November 26, 2014At Issue: April 15, 2016

ISSUE(S):

[REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals erred by applying comparative juror analysis to jurors dismissed by the defense before the prosecution accepted the panel, by comparing traits that defense counsel did not challenge, and by focusing on specific traits instead of considering all proffered reasons for striking each juror.

[REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals erred in applying Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), by remanding for additional findings where the trial court did not make express rulings on the credibility of the prosecution's proffered gender-neutral explanations for its peremptory challenges.

[REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals erred by holding that, under Snyder v. Louisiana, 552 U.S. 472 (2008), a reviewing court cannot credit a demeanor-based explanation for a peremptory strike where the trial court did not expresslyfind the explanation to be credible.

B000ctr

Text Box


2:30 p.m.SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADOOral Argument: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 EN BANCBailiff:

2015SA340 (1 HOUR)

In Re:

Plaintiffs:

Jessica Ferrer and Kathryn Winslow,

v.

Defendants:

Tesfamariam Okbamicael and Colorado Cab Company, LLC.

For the Plaintiffs Jessica Ferrer and Kathryn Winslow:James Edward PugaBenjamin I SachsBruce Lowell BraleyAlexander Royce WilschkeLEVENTHAL & PUGA, PCandTimothy Gill BuxtonTHE BUXTON LAW FIRM, P.C.

For the Defendants Tesfamariam Okbamicael andColorado Cab Company, LLC:Nicholas Bowles KlannEvan P. LeePeter J MorganBALDWIN MORGAN & RIDER, P.C.andDavid H YunJAUDON & AVERY LLP

For the Defendant Evan P. LeePeter J MorganNicholas Bowles KlannBALDWIN MORGAN & RIDER, P.C.andDavid H YunJAUDON & AVERY LLP

For Amicus Curiae COPIC Insurance Company:Kyle Wesley BrentonShannon Wells StevensonDAVIS GRAHAM & STUBBS LLP For Amicus Curiae Colorado Civil Justice League:Lee Allen Mickus

TAYLOR|ANDERSON LLP

B000ctr

Text Box


B000ctr

Text Box

For Amicus Curiae Colorado Defense Lawyers Association: Troy Robert Rackham FENNEMORE CRAIG, PC For Amicus Curiae Colorado Trial Lawyers Association: Joseph Francis Bennett CROSS & BENNETT LLC

B000ctr

Text Box

B000ctr

Text Box

Original Proceeding, District Court, Denver District Court, 2014CV32745 Docketed: December 23, 2015 At Issue: April 15, 2016 ISSUE(S): Did the trial court err by dismissing Petitioners' direct liability claims against Yellow Cab simply because it accepted vicarious liability for its driver? May Yellow Cab shield the results of its factual investigation into the circumstances of the July 15, 2011, collision by involving an attorney in that investigation and then asserting work product privilege? Did the trial court erroneously find that the withheld investigative records are not ordinary business records, contrary to this Court's holdings in Compton v. Safeway, Inc., 169 P.3d 135 (Colo. 2007), and Hawkins v.District Court, 638 P.2d 1372 (Colo. 1982)? Did the trial court err or abuse its discretion by denying Petitioners' motion to amend to add a claim for exemplary damages?

9:00 a.m.SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADOOral Argument: Wednesday, June 8, 2016 EN BANCBailiff:

2013SC408 (1 HOUR)

Petitioner:


v.

Respondent:

Atorrus Leon Rainer.

For the Petitioner The People of the State of Colorado:Rebecca Anne Adams Assistant Attorney GeneralOFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

For the Respondent Atorrus Leon Rainer:Kathleen Anne LordLORD LAW FIRM, LLCandAshley RatliffRATLIFF LAW FIRM, LLC

For Amici Curiae Center for Children's Law and Policy,Coalition for Juvenile Justice, Colorado Juvenile Defender Center, National Center for Youth Law, and Youth Law Center:Hannah Seigel ProffCOLORADO JUVENILE DEFENDER CENTERandMarsha LevickJUVENILE LAW CENTER For Amicus Curiae Colorado Criminal Defense BarPhilip Alan ChernerVICENTE SEDERBERG LLC For Amicus Curiae Campaign for the Fair Sentencingof Youth:Hannah Seigel ProffCOLORADO JUVENILE DEFENDER CENTERandJennifer AronoffMCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP For Amicus Curiae Office of the Colorado State Public DefenderRyann Shea HardmanCOLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER

Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2010CA2414Docketed: June 6, 2013At Issue: April 15, 2016

B000ctr

Text Box

Justice Boatright's Chambers

B000ctr

Text Box

Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2010CA2414 Docketed: June 6, 2013 At Issue: April 15, 2016 ISSUE(S): [REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals erred by extending Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), and Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012), to invalidate a consecutive term-of-years sentence imposed on a juvenile convicted of multiple offenses. [REFRAMED] Whether a conviction for attempted murder is a non-homicide offense within the meaning of Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010).

B000ctr

Line



Petitioner:

Cheryl Armstrong,

v.

Respondent:


For the Petitioner Cheryl Armstrong:Nicole M. MooneyMS&M LAW OFFICE

For the Respondent The People of the State of Colorado:Patricia Rae Van Horn andJoseph G. MichaelsOFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

For Amici Curiae Center for Children's Law and Policy(CCLP), Coalition for Juvenile Justice(CJJ),Colorado Juvenile Defender Center(CJDC), National Center for Youth Law (NCYL), Youth Law Center(YLC) and Juvenile Law Center:Marsha LevickJUVENILE LAW CENTER andKimberly Elizabeth Dvorchak NATIONAL JUVENILE DEFENDER CENTER For Amicus Curiae Colorado Criminal Defense Bar:Philip Alan ChernerVICENTE SEDERBERG LLC

B000ctr

Text Box


B000ctr

Text Box

Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2011CA2034 Docketed: December 2, 2013 At Issue: April 15, 2016 ISSUE(S): [REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals erred by extending Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), and Miller v. Alabama, 132 S.Ct. 2455 (2012), to invalidate a consecutive term-of-years sentence imposed on a juvenile convicted of multiple offenses. [ADDITIONAL ISSUE] Whether a conviction for second degree murder under a complicity theory is a non-homicide offense within the meaning of Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010).

B000ctr

Line

B000ctr

Sticky Note

MigrationConfirmed set by B000ctr



Petitioner:

Alejandro Estrada-Huerta,

v.

Respondent:


For the Petitioner Alejandro Estrada-Huerta:Stacie Louise Nelson CollingCOLORADO ALTERNATE DEFENSE COUNSELandTara Nicole JorfaldAntony Mark NobleTHE NOBLE LAW FIRM, LLC

For the Respondent The People of the State of Colorado:Joseph G. MichaelsOFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

For Amici Curiae Center for Children's Law and Policy(CCLP), Colorado Juvenile Defender Center(CJDC), Juvenile Law Center, National Center for Youth Law(NCYL), AND Youth Law Center(YLC):Marsha Levick JUVENILE LAW CENTER andKimberly Elizabeth DvorchakNATIONAL JUVENILE DEFENDER CENTER For Amicus Curiae Colorado Criminal Defense Bar:Philip Alan ChernerVICENTE SEDERBERG LLC

B000ctr

Text Box


B000ctr

Text Box

Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2011CA1932 Docketed: February 10, 2014 At Issue: April 15, 2016 ISSUE(S): [REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals erred by extending Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), and Miller v. Alabama, 132 S.Ct. 2455 (2012), to invalidate a consecutive term-of-years sentence imposed on a juvenile convicted of multiple offenses.



Petitioner:

Guy Lucero,

v.

Respondent:


For the Petitioner Guy Lucero:James W. HopkinsHOPKINS LAW LLCandEric A SamlerSAMLER & WHITSON, P.C.

For the Respondent The People of the State of Colorado:John T. Lee Assistant Attorney GeneralOFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

For Amicus Curiae Colorado Criminal Defense Bar:Philip Alan ChernerVICENTE SEDERBERG LLC For Amici Curiae Colorado Juvenile Defender Center and Juvenile Law Center:Marsha LevickJUVENILE LAW CENTERandKimberly Elizabeth DvorchakNATIONAL JUVENILE DEFENDER CENTER

Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2011CA2030Docketed: August 8, 2013At Issue: April 15, 2016

ISSUE(S):

[ADDITIONAL ISSUE] Whether a conviction for attempted murder is a non-homicide offense within the meaning of Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010).

[REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals erred by extending Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), and Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012), to invalidate a consecutive term-of-years sentence imposed on a juvenile convicted of multiple offenses.

[REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals exceeded its authority and violated the principle of party presentation by sua sponte treating the appeal of a properly filed Rule 35(b) motion as if it were an appeal of a Rule 35(c) motion.

B000ctr

Text Box


1:30 p.m.SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADOOral Argument: Wednesday, June 8, 2016 EN BANCBailiff:

2016SA75 (1 HOUR)

In Re:

Petitioner:

Department of Transportation, State of Colorado,

v.

Respondents:

Amerco Real Estate Company, a Nevada Corporation; Wells Fargo Foothill Inc., a California Corporation; Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, United States Bank; U-Haul Company of Colorado; Merrill Lynch Commercial Finance Corporation, a Delaware Corporation; Public Service Company of Colorado, a Colorado Corporation; Margaret Chapman, Public Trustee of Jefferson County; and Tim Kaufman, Treasurer of Jefferson County.

For the Petitioner Department of Transportation, State of Colorado:Lauren Marie CurranGregg Everett CarsonOFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

For the Respondents Amerco Real Estate Company, a Nevada Corporation and U-Haul Company of Colorado:Stephen D GurrCynthia Lowery-GraberBRYAN CAVE LLP

For the Respondent Public Service Company of Colorado, a Colorado Corporation:Julie Ann StencelXCEL ENERGY

For the Respondent Margaret Chapman, Public Trustee of Jefferson County:Gay Bookwald UmmelJEFFERSON COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

For the Respondent Tim Kaufman, Treasurer of Jefferson County:Casie Alaine StokesJEFFERSON COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

Original Proceeding, District Court, Jefferson County, 2015CV31797Docketed: February 25, 2016At Issue: April 13, 2016

ISSUE(S):

B000ctr

Text Box


B000ctr

Text Box

Whether CDOT has the authority to condemn under the procedures of Title 38 where the Commission has not adopted a project-specific “resolution upon its minutes” for the acquisition at a “duly called public meeting” pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 43-1-208(1) and (2), 43-1- 106(11), and 24-6-402(2). Whether the Colorado Transportation Commission (“Commission”) may delegate to CDOT's executive director the Commission's statutory duty to adopt a project-specific “resolution upon its minutes” for the acquisition at “a duly called public meeting” pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. §§43-1- 208(1) and (2), 43-1-106(11), and 24-6-402(2).

B000ctr

Line

B000ctr

Text Box

9:00 a.m.SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADOOral Argument: Thursday, June 9, 2016 EN BANCBailiff:


Petitioner:

Victor Mosley,

v.

Respondent:


For the Petitioner Victor Mosley:Karen Noelle Taylor Deputy Public DefenderOFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER

For the Respondent The People of the State of Colorado:Richard Harold OrmanDavid Christopher JonesGeorge Herbert BrauchlerOFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, 18TH J.D.

Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2008CA1565Docketed: February 23, 2012At Issue: January 20, 2016

ISSUE(S):

Whether, following reversal of the defendant's conviction by the court of appeals, the prosecution acted with the due diligence necessary to warrant a continuance of the defendant's retrial.

Whether the exclusions contained in section 18-1-405(6), C.R.S. (2012) apply to speedy trial calculations following reversal of a defendant's conviction under section 18-1-405(2), C.R.S. (2012).

B000ctr

Text Box

Justice Hood's Chambers



Petitioner:

Gerardo Joel Delacruz,

v.

Respondent:


For the Petitioner Gerardo Joel Delacruz:Alan Michael Kratz Deputy Public DefenderOffice of the Public Defender

For the Respondent The People of the State of Colorado:Majid Yazdi Assistant Attorney GeneralOffice of the Attorney General

Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals, 2010CA2364Docketed: December 11, 2013At Issue: April 15, 2016

ISSUE(S):

[REFRAMED] Whether the exclusions contained in section 18-1-405(6), C.R.S. (2014), apply to speedy trial calculations following reversal of a defendant's conviction under section 18-1-405(2), C.R.S.

Whether, if the exclusions in section 18-1-405(6) apply to the speedy trial period following reversal of a conviction, the trial court erred in finding that they authorized extension of the period in this case.

B000ctr

Text Box



2015SC83 (1 HOUR)

Petitioner:

Donald Johnson,

v.

Respondent:


For the Petitioner Donald Johnson:Ari Reuben KrichiverOFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER

For the Respondent The People of the State of Colorado:Michael J MilneDavid J Young17TH JUDICIAL DIST ATTYS OFFICE

Certiorari to the District Court, Adams County, 2008T 7449Docketed: January 29, 2015At Issue: April 15, 2016

ISSUE(S):

Whether the state's motion to change payee constitutes a new restitution request subject to the requirements of section 18-1.3-603, C.R.S. (2015).

B000ctr

Text Box


1:30 p.m.SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADOOral Argument: Thursday, June 9, 2016 EN BANCBailiff:


In Re:

Plaintiff:


v.

Defendant:

Sienna Johnson.

For the Plaintiff The People of the State of Colorado:Jason Robert SiersSusan Joyce TroutRichard Harold OrmanOFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, 18TH J.D.

For the Defendant Sienna Johnson:Ara K. OhanianRyann Shea HardmanHelen Massey HoopesOFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER

For Amici Curiae Colorado Behavioral Health Care Council and Colorado Juvenile Defender Center:Maxwell Norman ShafferSara Claire SharpDavid R FineHOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP

Original Proceeding, District Court, Douglas County, 2016CR4Docketed: March 21, 2016At Issue: May 6, 2016

ISSUE(S):

B000ctr

Text Box


B000ctr

Text Box

Original Proceeding, District Court, Douglas County, 2016CR4 Docketed: March 21, 2016 At Issue: May 6, 2016 ISSUE(S): Whether a juvenile charged as an adult in district court waives her psychotherapist-patient privilege in all existing mental health records simply because she exercises her right to request transfer of the proceedings to juvenile court under section 19-2-517(3), C.R.S. Whether the district court erred by ruling that a juvenile charged as an adult must always submit to a “mental health or psychological assessment or screening” by the Colorado Mental Health Institute at Pueblo whenever she exercises her right to seek transfer to juvenile court, notwithstanding the court of appeals' prior holding that “a juvenile who objects cannot be ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation for the purpose of a transfer hearing,” In re A.D.G., 895 P.2d 1067, 1073 (Colo. App. 1994).

2:15 p.m.SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADOOral Argument: Thursday, June 9, 2016 EN BANCBailiff:


In Re:

Plaintiff:


v.

Defendant:

Brooke Ann Higgins.

For the Plaintiff The People of the State of Colorado:Valerie Marie BrewsterDeborah S WrenholtJason Robert SiersSusan Joyce TroutRichard Harold OrmanOFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, 18TH J.D.

For the Defendant Brooke Ann Higgins:Iris EytanEYTAN NIELSEN LLCandKathleen Sinnott McGuireTHE MCGUIRE LAW OFFICE, LLCandSean ConnellyZONIES LAW LLC

Original Proceeding, District Court, Douglas County, 2016CR28Docketed: March 21, 2016At Issue: May 6, 2016

ISSUE(S):

B000ctr

Text Box


B000ctr

Text Box

B000ctr

Text Box

Whether the trial court erred in declining to suppress from consideration at an upcoming “reverse transfer” hearing (on whether Petitioner should be tried as a juvenile rather than adult) a psychological evaluation conducted pursuant to a magistrate's order.

B000ctr

Line

supreme court, state of colorado 9:00 a.m. oral … june...supreme court, state of colorado 10:00...

Documents