2020 CO 10
Colo.2020Background
- Colorado Supreme Court announced multiple decisions and certiorari dispositions on Feb 10, 2020, listing several opinions affirmed, petitions granted, and petitions denied.
- Several Court of Appeals judgments were vacated and remanded for reconsideration in light of recent Colorado Supreme Court precedent (Melton; Wells‑Yates; McRae).
- The Court made the Rule 21 petition in Chessin v. Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel absolute (19SA118).
- The Department of Corrections v. State Personnel Board certiorari petition was granted (reframed issue): whether the Board may reverse/modify disciplinary decisions only if three members find them arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law, and whether that standard precludes de novo review.
- The Grand County district court judgment in John Marshall was vacated and remanded for reconsideration in light of Martinez v. People.
- Numerous other certiorari petitions were denied en banc; a small set of matters were affirmed on the merits by the Court (e.g., Juarez; A.R. matters; M.A.W.).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Court of Appeals judgments must be reconsidered in light of recent Supreme Court rulings (Melton, Wells‑Yates, McRae) | Session (petitioner) argued the Court of Appeals decision should be reviewed under the newer precedent | People argued no reconsideration necessary or that prior appellate decision stands | Certiorari granted; judgments vacated and remanded for reconsideration in light of those decisions |
| Standard of review by State Personnel Board over appointing authority disciplinary decisions | Dept. of Corrections argued Board lacks authority to reverse/modify unless at least three members find the action arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law; and that such a standard limits de novo review | State Personnel Board/employee argued Board may review disciplinary decisions and apply appropriate standard (including de novo review) | Certiorari granted; question framed for review (whether three‑member finding requirement limits Board’s review); case accepted for plenary review |
| Whether district court decisions must be remanded under Martinez v. People | Petitioner (Marshall) contended Martinez requires reconsideration of lower‑court ruling | Respondent (People) contended no relief warranted or Martinez inapplicable | Certiorari granted; district court judgment vacated and remanded for reconsideration in light of Martinez |
| Whether to grant certiorari on numerous appellate petitions | Petitioners sought Supreme Court review on varied errors of law/fact | People or respondents opposed review arguing no substantial federal/state law issue or correct application below | Most petitions denied en banc; a subset were granted and remanded as noted above |
Key Cases Cited
- Melton v. People, 14SC282, 2019 CO 89 (Colorado Supreme Court decision cited as controlling precedent for remand)
- Wells‑Yates v. People, 16SC592, 2019 CO 90 (Colorado Supreme Court decision relied upon for reconsideration)
- People v. McRae, 16SC753, 2019 CO 91 (Colorado Supreme Court decision relied upon for reconsideration)
- Martinez v. People, 18SC482, 2020 CO 3 (Colorado Supreme Court decision prompting remand in Grand County matter)
- Rutter v. People, 2015 CO 71 (cited by a justice in connection with habitual sentencing/proportionality discussion)