2021 COA 112
Colo. Ct. App.2021Background
- Jennings was charged after a traffic stop with multiple drug- and weapon-related counts and faced serious felony exposure.
- Over the course of the case she twice discharged private counsel; the court initially declined to appoint the public defender but later appointed the public defender after the second retained attorney withdrew.
- Jennings moved to dismiss her second retained attorney, later sought replacement of the public defender for an asserted conflict, and the court denied appointment of alternate counsel without a hearing at that time.
- The court repeatedly declined to reduce Jennings’s $250,000 bond, a fact she later relied on to claim judicial bias.
- The parties reached a tentative disposition; at a providency hearing Jennings pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine with intent to manufacture or distribute, admitted the plea was voluntary, and the court advised her that the plea waived certain appellate rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Jennings) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether guilty plea waives claim that court denied Jennings’s right to counsel of choice by not immediately appointing the public defender | Guilty plea waives nonjurisdictional pre-plea challenges | Immediate denial to appoint PD deprived her of counsel of choice and was structural error | Waived by guilty plea; claim precluded because she did not challenge plea adequacy |
| Whether guilty plea waives claim that the court erred by not appointing alternate counsel for an alleged conflict with the public defender | Guilty plea waives stand-alone ineffective-assistance/conflict claims not tied to plea voluntariness | Failure to appoint alternate counsel forced her to proceed with conflicted counsel | Waived by guilty plea; no challenge to plea adequacy, so claim precluded |
| Whether guilty plea waives claim that the trial judge was actually biased and therefore disqualified | Guilty plea extinguishes pre-plea errors | Judge displayed actual bias (hostility over counsel changes, bond decisions, remarks) that should disqualify him | Guilty plea does not waive claim of actual bias; but record does not show actual bias, so claim fails and conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 (U.S. 2006) (erroneous deprivation of counsel of choice is structural error)
- Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258 (U.S. 1973) (guilty plea generally waives claims relating to pre-plea constitutional deprivations)
- Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (U.S. 1994) (opinions formed during proceedings do not alone establish disqualifying bias absent deep-seated antagonism)
- United States v. Gipson, 835 F.2d 1323 (10th Cir. 1988) (guilty plea waives appearance-of-impropriety claims but not claims of actual bias)
- United States v. Troxell, 887 F.2d 830 (7th Cir. 1989) (actual-bias claims survive a guilty plea)
- People v. Julien, 47 P.3d 1194 (Colo. 2002) (de novo review of judicial disqualification issues; distinguishes appearance v. actual bias)
- People v. Drake, 748 P.2d 1237 (Colo. 1988) (defendant must show judge had a "substantial bent of mind" against him)
- Brewster v. Dist. Ct., 811 P.2d 812 (Colo. 1991) (hostility toward counsel generally does not require recusal absent extreme circumstances)
- People v. Gallegos, 251 P.3d 1056 (Colo. 2011) (recusal required where impartiality might reasonably be questioned)
- People v. Isham, 923 P.2d 190 (Colo. App. 1995) (disqualification of counsel does not automatically vitiate a guilty plea)
- People v. Schupper, 124 P.3d 856 (Colo. App. 2005) (judicial rulings, even if numerous or erroneous, do not alone establish bias)