People v. District Court In and For Second Judicial Dist., 26864
Decision Date | 21 July 1975 |
Docket Number | No. 26864,26864 |
Citation | 189 Colo. 159,538 P.2d 887 |
Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado and Dale Tooley, District Attorney in and for the Second Judicial District, State of Colorado, Petitioners, v. The DISTRICT COURT, IN AND FOR the SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT, State of Colorado, the Honorable Robert E. McLean, District Judge thereof, Respondents. |
Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Dale Tooley, Dist. Atty., O. Otto Moore, Asst. Dist. Atty., Brooke Wunnicke, Chief Appellate Deputy Dist. Atty., Denver, for petitioners.
Holm, Willis & Dill, P.C., Jon L. Holm, Denver, for respondents.
This is an original proceeding. The district attorney petitioned for a writ in the nature of mandamus and prohibition. It was therein urged that an order by the respondent district court disqualifying the district attorney and his staff from further participating as prosecutor in a pending criminal action be invalidated by this court. We issued a rule on the respondent district court to show cause why the relief requested should not be granted. A response and briefs by the parties have now been filed. Our review reveals that the order disqualifying the district attorney and his staff is clearly improper, and we therefore make the rule absolute by granting the relief sought.
Charles E. Blair is charged by a grand jury indictment with twenty counts of fraudulent sale of securities, and a single count of conspiracy. District attorney, Dale Tooley, was a candidate for mayor of Denver at the time of the respondent district court's ruling.
On May 11, 1975, the Rocky Mountain News, published an editorial endorsing the district attorney's candidacy for mayor. The only reference to the defendant Blair was contained in the following paragraph:
On May 19, 1975, the Committee to Elect Dale Tooley mayor of Denver caused an exact copy of the Rocky Mountain News editorial to be published in the Denver Post as a paid political advertisement.
On May 22, 1975, counsel for defendant Blair presented to a deputy district attorney a motion to disqualify the district attorney from further '. . . prosecutorial contact with the defendant Charles E. Blair.' No prior or other notice of the motion was given to the district attorney. The trial judge, before whom certain other motions in this case were pending and scheduled for hearing on that day, was otherwise occupied. He directed the parties to the clerk of the chief judge for reassignment to another division of the district court.
At 11:35 a.m., the pending motions were placed with the respondent district judge for hearing and disposition. However, rather than conducting a hearing on the previously filed motions, the respondent district judge chose to consider only the just filed motion to disqualify the district attorney. The objection of the deputy district attorney as shown from the transcript of the hearing clearly pointed out the real difficulty and impropriety in the respondent district court's precipitous consideration of this motion.
The respondent district judge overruled this objection, heard arguments, and then granted the defendant's motion to disqualify the district attorney. The ruling was entered just two hours after the deputy district attorney first received the motion.
The defendant's motion was apparently motivated by the district attorney's personal participation before the grand jury which indicted Blair, the publicity generated by the return of the indictment, the citation of the Blair case in the editorial, and the use of this editorial in a political advertisement.
The parties have thoroughly briefed the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. In the Interest of N.R., Case No. 05SA273 (Colo. 7/31/2006)
... ... Case No. 05SA294 ... Supreme Court of Colorado ... En Banc ... June 26, 2006 ... abused its discretion in disqualifying district attorney and assistant district attorney based on ... Watson, District Attorney, Thirteenth Judicial District, Robert C. James, Deputy District ... would constitute the offenses of attempted second-degree murder, section 18-3-103(1), 18-2-101 ... Sandstrom v. Dist. Court , 884 P.2d 707, 711 (Colo. 1994) ("`[T]he ... ...
-
People v. Rodriguez
... ... No. 91SA112 ... Supreme Court of Colorado, ... March 11, 1996 ... As ... Appeal from the District Court, City and County of Denver; Honorable ... -degree aggravated motor vehicle theft, second-degree kidnapping, aggravated robbery, conspiracy ... Dist. Ct., City & Cty. of Denver, 719 P.2d 699 ... were voluntary); Issue 99(B) (alleging judicial bias); 18 Issue 100 (alleging error in the ... ...
-
State v. Hohman, 32-79
... ... No. 32-79 ... Supreme Court of Vermont ... July 24, 1980 ... Reargument ... the defendant guilty of murder in the second degree. 13 V.S.A. § 2301. On appeal to this ... 876, 83 S.Ct. 145, 9 L.Ed.2d 115 (1962); People v. District Court, 189 Colo. 159, 162-63, 538 ... ...
-
People v. Kriho
... ... No. 97CA0700 ... Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. I ... April 29, 1999 ... we sued a developer down in Boulder District Court ... Court: Was there anything about ... that makes you unhappy or angry with the judicial system? ... Kriho: No ... Court: Is there ... On the second day of deliberations, Kriho remained the sole ... ...