People ex rel. J.W. v. C.O., 2017 CO 105

Background

In May 2014 the Clear Creek County Department filed a dependency/neglect petition concerning two children; the father admitted and was adjudicated; Mother initially denied the petition and went to a jury trial.
The jury found no neglect for lack of parental care and deadlocked on whether the environment was injurious, so no adjudication resulted from the trial.
At a July 14, 2014 hearing Mother waived a new trial and admitted the petition allegation that the children were neglected due to an injurious environment; the court accepted the admission as knowing and voluntary.
The court and parties thereafter proceeded as if an adjudication had occurred, Mother followed a court-approved treatment plan for about a year, and multiple review hearings took place; a proposed written adjudication was prepared but not signed until after appeal.
The Department moved to terminate Mother’s parental rights; the trial court terminated them in September 2015, finding the children had been adjudicated as neglected; Mother did not object below to the adjudication finding.
The court of appeals vacated the termination judgment because no written adjudication had been entered before termination; the Colorado Supreme Court reversed, holding the trial court retained jurisdiction because Mother’s admitted facts established the children’s neglected status.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether failure to enter a written adjudication after accepting a parent's admission divests the juvenile court of jurisdiction to terminate parental rights	The Department: admission established the child’s neglected/dependent status and thus the court had jurisdiction to proceed even if a written adjudication was not yet entered	Mother/court of appeals majority: statutory language requires an adjudication; without a signed adjudication order the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to terminate parental rights	Court held: admission satisfied the adjudicatory purpose and established the child’s status; failure to sign a written adjudication before termination did not divest jurisdiction under these circumstances
Whether the court’s failure to enter a written adjudication deprived Mother of due process or fundamental fairness	Department: Mother’s voluntary admission and subsequent participation waived any due process concern	Mother: lack of a formal adjudication deprived her of procedural protections and jurisdictional safeguards	Court held: because Mother knowingly admitted, participated in treatment and hearings, never withdrew admission or objected, the omission did not violate due process
Whether an unsigned adjudication later signed after appeal can cure the omission	Department: late signing could reflect the original effective date and does not affect jurisdictional analysis when admission was accepted	Mother/court of appeals: post-appeal signing is ineffective because appeal divested trial court of authority to enter substantive orders	Court held: the determinative fact was the accepted admission and parties’ conduct; the court did not rely on the late signed order to confer jurisdiction
Whether failure to enter a written adjudication is a jurisdictional defect or a procedural error waivable by the parties	Department: it is procedural and waivable when party admits and proceeds	Mother/court of appeals: the statute makes adjudication a jurisdictional prerequisite to termination	Court held: the omission was a procedural defect under these facts and did not divest the juvenile court of jurisdiction once the admission established the child’s status

Key Cases Cited

Bostelman v. People, 162 P.3d 686 (interpretation of clear statutory language governs)
People in Interest of A.M.D., 648 P.2d 625 (jurisdiction of juvenile court is triggered by child’s neglected/dependent status)
In re Marriage of Stroud, 631 P.2d 168 (judgment rendered without jurisdiction is void)
Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc. v. Adams, 718 P.2d 508 (subject-matter jurisdiction concerns class of cases court may entertain)
People in Interest of A.M., 786 P.2d 476 (juvenile proceedings and dismissal when status not established)