OPINIONS

The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado 
2 East 14th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80203

2016 CO 6

Supreme Court Case No. 15SA151 
Original Proceeding Pursuant to C.A.R. 21 
Adams County District Court Case No. 14CV31314
Honorable Ted C. Tow III, Judge

In Re
Plaintiff: 

P.W., Individually and as Guardian and Conservator for K.W., a Minor Child,
v.
Defendants:

Children’s Hospital Colorado; Children’s Hospital Colorado Health System; and The
Children’s Hospital Association, d/b/a The Children’s Hospital Corporation, d/b/a
The Children’s Hospital of Colorado.

Rule Discharged 
en banc

CHIEF JUSTICE RICE delivered the Opinion of the Court. JUSTICE EID does not participate.


The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado 
2 East 14th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80203

2016 CO 7

Supreme Court Case No. 13SC904 
Certiorari to the Colorado Court of Appeals 
Court of Appeals Case No. 09CA1506

Petitioner: 
Salvador Esquivel-Castillo,
v.
Respondent: 
The People of the State of Colorado.

Judgment Affirmed 
en banc

JUSTICE COATS delivered the Opinion of the Court.


The Supreme Court of the State of Colorado 
2 East 14th Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80203

2016 CO 8

Supreme Court Case No. 14SA84

Certification of Question of Law

United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Case No. 13-1369

Plaintiff-Appellee: 
Stephen Brett Ryals,
v.
Defendant-Appellant: 
City of Englewood.

Certified Question Answered 
en banc

JUSTICE EID delivered the Opinion of the Court.

JUSTICE HOOD concurs in part and dissents in part, and JUSTICE GABRIEL joins in the concurrence in part and dissent in part.


PETITIONS FOR REHEARING 
NONE


PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

No. 14SC868

Court of Appeals Case No. 12CA2290

Petitioner:

Anthony Lawrence Garcia,

v.

Respondent:

The People of the State of Colorado.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC. JUSTICE MÁRQUEZ does not participate.


No. 15SC185

Court of Appeals Case No. 11CA118

Petitioner:

Herbert Benjamin Alexander,

v.

Respondent:

The People of the State of Colorado.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC241

Court of Appeals Case No. 12CA904

Petitioner:

Franco Romero,

v.

Respondent:

The People of the State of Colorado.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC286

Court of Appeals Case No. 11CA2313

Petitioner:

Juan Lorenzo Johnson,

v.

Respondent:

The People of the State of Colorado.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC366

Court of Appeals Case No. 12CA579

Petitioner:

Felicia Michelle Moon,

v.

Respondent:

The People of the State of Colorado.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC. JUSTICE MÁRQUEZ would grant as to the following issue:

Whether, when a defendant is charged with criminal attempt to obtain a controlled substance by fraud and deceit, pursuant to section 18-18-415(1)(a), C.R.S. (2015), a physician’s prescription order issued to the defendant is admissible at trial because it falls within section 18-18-415(1)(b), the statutory exception which allows disclosure of otherwise privileged physician-patient communications under certain circumstances.


No. 15SC421

Court of Appeals Case No. 10CA1993

Petitioner/Cross-Respondent:

Parish Ramon Carter,

v.

Respondent/Cross-Petitioner:

The People of the State of Colorado.

Petition and Cross-Petition for Writ of Certiorari GRANTED. EN BANC. Summary of Issues:

[REFRAMED] Whether the court of appeals incorrectly held that the police’s Miranda  (Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)) violation was harmless error for defendant’s convictions of specific-intent crimes.

Whether the court of appeals erred in following People v. Gingles, 2014 COA 163, to declare that a defendant’s testimonial statements are not governed by this Court’s decisions in Frasco v. People, 165 P.3d 701 (Colo. 2007), and DeBella v. People, 233 P.3d 664 (Colo. 2010), which held that trial courts must exercise discretionary control to prevent a deliberating jury from using testimonial exhibits in an unfairly prejudicial manner.

Whether the court of appeals erred in concluding that the advisement to the defendant that he had “the right to have an attorney” did not adequately inform him that he had the right to the presence of an attorney before and during interrogation.

DENIED AS TO ALL OTHER ISSUES.


No. 15SC424

Court of Appeals Case No. 14CA405

In re the Parental Responsibility Concerning:

B.C.B., a child,

Petitioner:

Cory Robert Ballentine,

v.

Respondent:

Abby Lynn Corea.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC495

Court of Appeals Case No. 15CA5

Petitioner:

ACRO Service Corporation,

v.

Respondents:

Colorado Department of Personnel and Administration and Governor’s Office of

Information Technology.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC530

Court of Appeals Case No. 11CA475

Petitioner:

Paul Wayne Stark,

v.

Respondent:

The People of the State of Colorado.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC607

Court of Appeals Case No. 14CA254

Petitioner:

David Vititoe,

v.

Respondent:

Rocky Mountain Pavement Maintenance, Inc., n/k/a Polk Holdings Company, Inc.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC720

Larimer County District Court Case No. 14CV150

Petitioner:

Randolph Glenn Jensen,

v.

Respondent:

The People of the State of Colorado.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC845

Court of Appeals Case No. 12CA2168

Petitioner:

Connie L. Liphford,

v.

Respondent:

The People of the State of Colorado.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC1043

Court of Appeals Case No. 14CA2287

Petitioner:

Scott E. Foster,

v.

Respondent:

Clifford E. Riedel, solely in his capacity as Eighth Judicial District Attorney.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari Pursuant to C.A.R. 50 DENIED. EN BANC.


No. 15SC1078

Court of Appeals Case No. 15CA820

Petitioner:

The People of the State of Colorado, In the Interest of Minor Child: K.B. and Concerning

Respondent:

S.B.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED. EN BANC.

JUSTICE BOATRIGHT would grant as to the following issue:

Whether the court of appeals erred in their application of the standard of review required to review a trial court’s findings and orders and instead made factual determinations that are solely within the trial court’s discretion.

Return