District Atty. In and For Alamosa County v. District Court In and For Alamosa County, 20210

• Decision Date: 07 May 1962
• Docket Number: No. 20210,20210
• Citation: 150 Colo. 136,371 P.2d 271
• Parties: The DISTRICT ATTORNEY IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF ALAMOSA and State of Colorado, Honorable John B. Smith, District Attorney, Petitioner, v. The DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF ALAMOSA, State of Colorado, Honorable George H. Blickhahn, Judge, Respondent.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

Page 271

371 P.2d 271

150 Colo. 136

The DISTRICT ATTORNEY IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF ALAMOSA and State of Colorado, Honorable John B. Smith District Attorney, Petitioner, v. The DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF ALAMOSA, State of Colorado, Honorable George H. Blickhahn, Judge Respondent.

No. 20210.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

May 7, 1962.

John B. Smith pro se, Donald G. Smith, Alamosa, for petitioner.

Respondent, pro se.

MOORE, Justice.

This is an original proceeding commenced by John B. Smith, district attorney of the Twelfth Judicial District of Colorado, for the purpose of challenging a judgment entered February 1, 1962, under which the petitioner was found by the respondent to be in contempt of court and assessed a fine of $25.00.

In his petition for a rule on respondent to show cause why the challenged judgment should not be vacated, Smith alleged, inter alia:

'3. That on the date aforesaid, two criminal matters had been continued from the previous date of January 31, 1962, to February 1, 1962, at 10:00 o'clock A.M., one for the purposes of arraignment and the other matter for the purposes of taking evidence following a guilty plea; that your petitioner, in his official capacity, had designated George W. Woodard, Deputy District Attorney for Alamosa County, to appear in the District Court at Alamosa to represent the State on the said criminal matters; that on February 1, 1962, your petitioner was appearing in the District Court of Rio Grande County for the routine handling of some eleven criminal cases with some fourteen defendants; that it was not until 9:30 A.M. of February 1, 1962, that your petitioner was advised that his deputy aforementioned had another appointment for that date; that in the absence of the respondent, George H. Blickhahn, being present at respondent's office in the courthouse, Alamosa, Colorado, your petitioner notified the undersheriff of Alamosa County of his inability to be present or for a deputy District Attorney to be present in the Alamosa District Court on that date and instructed said undersheriff to so inform the Court upon the Court's arrival, that said undersheriff so informed the Court and, further, that your petitioner would return to Alamosa at the hour of 2:30 to 3:00 P.M. that afternoon of said date, that your petitioner did so return and did appear on behalf of the State in the aforementioned criminal matters and at the conclusion of said criminal matters the respondent conducted the proceedings set forth in petitioner's EXHIBIT A.'

Exhibit A above referred to is the transcript of proceedings relating to the contempt matter as follows:

'BY MR. SMITH: We have nothing further your honor.

'BY THE JUDGE: The Court has a little something further.

'BY MR. SMITH: Yes, sir.

'BY THE JUDGE: Court was scheduled for ten o'clock this morning and you or your office was not represented.

'BY MR. SMITH: This was regular motion day in Del Norte and I had already planned on being there. My deputy, George Woodard, was committed to an appointment in Monte Vista and therefore was unable to be here at that time.

'BY THE JUDGE: The Court was not so advised. This matter was set for hearing at 10:00 A.M. this morning. There have been inconvenienced witnesses, the Sheriff's office, Police Force, counsel, and the Court. The Court doesn't permit a matter of this kind to pass unnoticed and feels that the excuse is not sufficient. It will be the order of the Court that the situation as it exists--the District Attorney is adjudged guilty of contempt of Court and will be fined in the sum of $25.00 and will stand committed to the custody of the Sheriff until the fine is paid. The Court will be in recess.'

Following issuance of the Rule to Show Cause the respondent District Court, and the Honorable George H. Blickhahn the Judge thereof, filed 'Answer and Return to Rule...