Legal Opinion

People in Interest of Clinton

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided September 8, 1987No. 86CA0288PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STERNBERG, Judge.

In this proceeding concerning the certification of an individual for mental health treatment, the dispositive issue concerns the requirement under § 27-10-107(5), C.R.S. (1982 Repl. Vol. 11) that the court appoint an attorney to represent the respondent in a certification proceeding “forthwith.” The respondent, Wendy Ann Clinton, argues that this requirement must be met for the court to have subject matter jurisdiction over the certification. Since the trial court found that there was not a forthwith appointment of counsel, she urges that it lacked jurisdiction to confirm her…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In re the Marriage of StroudSupreme Court of Colorado · 1981
  2. State Ex Rel. City of Kansas City v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1951
  3. Barber v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1953
  4. Hook v. WrightIllinois Supreme Court · 1928
  5. People v. SmithColorado Court of Appeals · 1983

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. In the Interest of ClintonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
  2. People in the Interest of LynchSupreme Court of Colorado · 1989
  3. People in Interest of DveirinSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
  4. People Ex Rel. BaileyColorado Court of Appeals · 1987
  5. PeopleColorado Court of Appeals · 1988

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API