262 P.3d 895
Colo. Ct. App.2010Background
- Termination of parental rights of C.Z. by the district court following a contested hearing; Indian child status brings ICWA into play.
- Counsel for both parents sought to withdraw and to substitute appellate counsel after notices of appeal were filed.
- Colorado child-dependency proceedings allow substitution of court-appointed appellate counsel after a petition on appeal, but require good cause.
- A.L.L. v. People rejected a blanket Anders withdrawal in dependency/neglect appeals and required counsel to file petitions on appeal.
- This court later adopted the criminal standard for substitution based on good cause, while recognizing limits on delay and ethical considerations.
- Court affirms termination and ICWA compliance, including notice to the tribe and active efforts findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard for appellate counsel withdrawal | ALL. governs; withdrawal may occur if meritless arguments exist | criminal standard applies; good cause supports substitution | Criminal standard for good cause applies; substitution proper under CAR 3.4(j)(2) |
| ICWA notice to father’s tribe satisfied | Department notified Blackfeet Reservation and BIA; tribe did not intervene | Not contested; tribe not eligible for membership | Notice complied with ICWA for father's tribe |
| ICWA active efforts requirement satisfied | Department made extensive active efforts for both parents | Some services not provided after move to Denver | Active efforts satisfied for both father and mother; department not required to continue futile services |
| Overall ICWA compliance in termination | Notice and active efforts requirements met; termination proper | Challenged ICWA compliance on active efforts | ICWA compliance established; termination affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- A.L.L. v. People, 226 P.3d 1054 (Colo.2010) (rejects blanket Anders withdrawal; requires filings and issue development by counsel)
- People in Interest of Z.P., 167 P.3d 211 (Colo.App.2007) (withdrawal standards in civil vs. criminal contexts; supports counseling safeguards)
- In re Estate of Becker, 32 P.3d 557 (Colo.App.2000) (one panel not obligated to follow other districts' precedent;)
- KD., 155 P.3d 634 (Colo.App.2007) (active efforts may be discontinued if past efforts have no success)
- A.J.H., 184 P.3d 576 (Colo.App.2008) (context for ICWA active efforts v. reasonable efforts distinction (cited))