2020 CO 42
Colo.2020Background
- Huckabay was arrested and initially charged with misdemeanor DUI, released on personal recognizance, then the People filed an amended information charging him with DUI — fourth or subsequent offense (a class 4 felony).
- Huckabay moved for a preliminary hearing under §16-5-301(1)(a) and Crim. P. 7(h)(1), arguing his felony DUI charge required “mandatory sentencing” (either DOC time or probation with county-jail time) and thus triggered a preliminary hearing right.
- The district court denied the motion; Huckabay sought relief in the Colorado Supreme Court via C.A.R. 21.
- The Supreme Court considered whether an out-of-custody defendant charged with class 4 felony DUI is entitled to a preliminary hearing when the charge requires “mandatory sentencing.”
- The court held that “mandatory sentencing,” by plain meaning, includes any period of incarceration required by law (DOC or county jail as a condition of probation), so felony DUI triggers the preliminary-hearing right; the rule was made absolute and the case remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Huckabay) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an out-of-custody defendant charged with felony DUI is entitled to a preliminary hearing under §16-5-301(1)(a) / Crim. P. 7(h)(1). | The People argued (implicit) that preliminary-hearing entitlement should not extend to out-of-custody defendants unless the statute contemplates it. | Huckabay argued that his class 4 felony DUI requires “mandatory sentencing,” triggering a statutory right to a preliminary hearing. | Held: Yes. A defendant charged with a class 4, 5, or 6 felony that requires mandatory sentencing is entitled to a preliminary hearing; Huckabay’s felony DUI qualifies. |
| Whether “mandatory sentencing” refers only to DOC imprisonment or includes mandatory county-jail time as a condition of probation. | The People contended “mandatory sentencing” means only incarceration in the Department of Corrections. | Huckabay argued “mandatory sentencing” encompasses any legally required period of incarceration, including county-jail terms imposed as a condition of probation. | Held: “Mandatory sentencing” includes any statutorily required incarceration; felony DUI requires imprisonment either in DOC or county jail as a condition of probation. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Tafoya, 434 P.3d 1193 (Colo. 2019) (held an in-custody defendant charged with felony DUI is entitled to a preliminary hearing)
- McCoy v. People, 442 P.3d 379 (Colo. 2019) (statutory interpretation reviewed de novo and statutes construed as a whole)
- People v. Austin, 419 P.3d 587 (Colo. 2018) (noting “mandatory sentencing” is not expressly defined)
- Wolf Ranch, LLC v. City of Colo. Springs, 220 P.3d 559 (Colo. 2009) (start statutory interpretation with plain language)
- Mook v. Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs, 457 P.3d 568 (Colo. 2020) (presumption that statutory “shall” is mandatory)
- People v. Kilgore, 455 P.3d 746 (Colo. 2020) (explaining when original Rule 21 relief is appropriate)