 | |
|
Robert D.
Gustafson, Attorney At Law
COLORADO SPRINGS TRIAL LAWYER
|
6538 Charter
Drive
Colorado Springs, CO 80918-1335
Phone (719) 260-1002
Toll Free (800) 410-1002
E-MAIL
ATTORNEY
|
Attorney
Business Hours
Attorney
Availability Status
FREE
INITIAL CONSULTATION
Fax (719) 260-1003
|
JURISDICTIONAL
ATTACK
COLORADO SPRINGS
CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY |
WELCOME
I appreciate your interest
perhaps I will become your attorney |
 |
Criminal Jurisdictional Attack - Colorado Springs criminal & traffic defense. Defects in charging or commencement of prosecution may deprive the court of the power to hear a criminal case. failure to sign or serve summons and complaint, failure to adequately identify defendant, failure to arrest or obtain defendant's signature for promise to appear, failure to timely file summons and complaint, statutory citation, inadequate notice before first court appearance, appearance date set on holiday, weekend or date - time court not open, impossibility - appearance date or time omitted, appearance date precedes offense date, in futuro offense - crime charged on a future date, offense date omitted, tickets for same offense charged in multiple courts -
joinder, double jeopardy & estoppel, jurisdiction & venue - failure to allege offense committed at location within the court's power.
Ideas contained in this web page may be very important in relation to a criminal, DUI or
traffic case. When a defendant attacks the
jurisdiction of the court, defense requests dismissal because the court does not have
power to hear the case. If granted, the case must be dismissed without
reaching the merits - that's a win for the defendant regardless of the facts. Two attacks
may be made:
1. in personem jurisdiction -
personal jurisdiction - most common attack
2. in rem jurisdiction - subject
matter jurisdiction
When an in personem jurisdictional attack is filed, defendant or litigant
enters a limited (special) appearance claiming the court lacks power over his /
her person to enter any order other than dismissal. When an in rem
jurisdictional attack is
filed, it is deemed a general appearance by the defendant or litigant, and he /
she claims the court does not have power over the subject matter of the
litigation. e.g.
1. in personem. Defendant does not contest that the court has power to
hear misdemeanor criminal cases for DUI criminal acts committed within the
county and state, but claims that charging errors committed by law enforcement or
prosecution fail to bring the defendant within the power of the court.
2. in rem. Defendant essentially states, Hi judge, I'm here, but
you don't have power to decide any case of this nature. As example,
municipal courts may hear petty theft - shoplifting cases, but lack the
power to hear a serious felony theft - robbery.
|
SPECIFIC
ATTACKS
caveat - more law is applicable - just a brief overview here |
a. LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER(S) FAILURE TO ISSUE
(SIGN) THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT(S).
Failure to issue (sign) the
summons and complaint(s) fail(s) to confer jurisdiction upon the Court over the person
of the defendant.
-
Whether a printed name constitutes
signing or a valid signature is an issue of first impression in federal and
state appellate criminal law as of July 9, 2003. Civil business law cases
& statutes + electronic signature law + election law exists regarding
whether a printed name constitutes a valid signature.
-
Three El Paso County
District Court cases have been decided locally (1987 & preceding), however
they are not reported decisions and therefore not precedent.
-
Contested issue will
likely arise over the officer(s)' intent when printing his / her name.
Records procured pursuant to subpoena duces tecum upon the law enforcement
agency employment and payroll departments are probative on intent and whether
the officer(s) use(s) a printed name or cursive signature when
"signing."
*
* *
* *
* *
*
b. FAILURE TO SERVE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT(S) UPON THE
DEFENDANT. Non-service of summons and
complaint(s) upon defendant fails to confer jurisdiction upon the Court over the person
of the defendant.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
c. FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY AND CORRECTLY IDENTIFY THE
DEFENDANT. Charging document fails to adequately and correctly identify
defendant such that he / she may use judgment as a bar to prosecution - double
jeopardy.
-
Defendant may not give false information to the arresting
officer(s) nor may defendant mislead the officer(s) in any manner which may
contribute to the error in the name of the person charged.
-
Note - CRS
42-4-1701(2) permits name amendment and may be problematic, however a myriad of
caselaw exists on the subject.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
d. FAILURE TO ARREST OR OBTAIN PROMISE TO APPEAR -
LICENSED COLORADO DRIVER
-
Defendant did not sign the summons and complaint nor promise to appear
-
Defendant was given the summons and complaint, however not arrested or booked
-
Defendant did not hold a valid Colorado driver's license at the time the
summons and complaint(s) were issued and served - NOTE - valid Colorado driver's
license invalidates this argument.
Evidence:
Colorado driving abstract reflecting suspension, revocation or denial in effect
date of allege offense
Out of state license, out of state DMV driving abstract reflecting valid status,
and Colorado DMV search - no record result
-
Defendant may not give false information to the arresting
officer(s) nor mislead
the officer(s) in any manner which may contribute to the error failure to arrest
upon refusal to sign a promise to appear.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
e. FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE. The state failed to file
the summons and complaint(s) immediately with the Clerk of Court.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
f. FAILURE TO PROVIDE CORRECT STATUTORY CITATION. Statutory citation in charging document refers to a non-existent
statute, or a statute unrelated to the offense indicated in the brief
description, or charging document lacks reference to any statute allegedly
violated.
This motion may be denied and motion to amend granted - not worthy of argument
absent other concurrent jurisdictional attacks.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
g. FAILURE TO PROVIDE 20 DAYS NOTICE between service
of the summons and complaint(s) and prior to court appearance -
alcohol related offenses
*
* *
* *
* *
*
h. FAILURE TO PROVIDE 30 DAYS NOTICE between service
of the summons and complaint(s) and prior to court appearance -penalty assessment notices - traffic
infractions.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
i. APPEARANCE DATE - WEEKEND,
HOLIDAY OR TIME COURT NOT OPEN. This argument has been rejected and will
not be successful. I will not file a jurisdictional attack upon these
grounds, but include in this web page because I have had numerous inquiries
-
"If, on a holiday . . . or on any day when the public office concerned
is closed, or on a Saturday . . . any document is required to be filed or
any appearance or return is required to be made at any . . . public office,
or any official or employee of such public office is required to perform any
act or any duty of his office, then any such filing, appearance, return,
act, or duty so required or scheduled shall neither be abated nor defaulted,
but the same shall stand continued to the next succeeding full business day
at such public office at the same time and place." CRS 24-11-110
-
ON
POINT CASE. Because CRS 24-11-110 applies here, it is plain that the county court was not
purged of its otherwise proper jurisdiction over plaintiff simply because of
the appearance date on his summons and complaint. Hence, the district court
properly rejected plaintiff's writ of prohibition. Banos v. El Paso
County Court, 804 P.2d 259 (Colo. App. 1990)
*
* *
* *
* *
*
j. SUMMONS PROVIDES UNSPECIFIED COURT APPEARANCE DATE - DATE OR YEAR LEFT
BLANK. Defective notice - impossible court appearance and failure to
provide adequate notice of possible court appearance.
Regarding impossibility, see ¶ L below.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
k. COURT APPEARANCE DATE PRECEDES SUMMONS DATE. Impossible court
appearance and failure to provide adequate notice of possible court appearance.
Regarding impossibility, see ¶ L below.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
l. IN FUTURO OFFENSE ALLEGED IN CHARGING DOCUMENT -
IMPOSSIBILITY. Charging
document alleges an offense date in the future - offense not possible of commission -
impossible to have committed a crime in the future + failure to charge within
statute of limitations.
Regarding in-futuro impossibility, multiple cases have been decided on
point.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
m.
FAILURE TO ALLEGE ANY DATE OF OFFENSE -
STATUTE
OF LIMITATIONS BAR TO PROSECUTION, INADEQUATE NOTICE & IMPOSSIBILITY.
Summons and complaints fatally defective for failure to charge an
offense within the time prescribed by the statute of limitations and failure to
allege any date whatsoever - inadequate notice and impossibility. Prosecution is
barred.
Regarding impossibility, see ¶ L above.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
n. FAILURE TO JOIN IN A SINGLE PROSECUTION -
JOINDER, DOUBLE JEOPARDY & ESTOPPEL
This circumstance usually arises when police "split tickets" between
municipal court and county court for the same traffic episode. Final disposition
in one court (usually municipal) may foreclose prosecution in the other court
(usually county).
All
alleged acts in both of the cases must arise out of the same alleged criminal
episode.
Defense
must file joinder notice and objection in each case; providing copies to each
relevant prosecutor.
Prosecutors then have actual knowledge of the concurrent
multiple filings.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
o. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS BAR TO PROSECUTION.
Failure to charge an offense within the time prescribed by the
statute of
limitations. Prosecution is barred. Refer to link for additional
information.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
p.
FAILURE TO ALLEGE ANY OFFENSE LOCATION WITHIN
VENUE. Venue and jurisdiction are lacking and
improper. Summons and complaint(s)
defective based upon omission and failure to allege an offense location within the
jurisdiction and venue of the Court.
People v. Steiner, 640 P.2d 250, 252 ¶¶ 3-11
(Colo. App. 1981) - (venue insufficiency fatal-cannot be cured by
evidence).
Attorney note - allegation of may be non-existent location, or location
within a different jurisdiction will likely result in amendment or change of
venue.
State court - offense committed
in another county.
Municipal court - offense committed outside city
limits should result in dismissal - beyond jurisdictional boundaries.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
q.
OTHER JURISDICTIONAL ARGUMENTS
presented by former cases.
-
State court argument: Ft.
Carson is a federal reservation - not part of the state of Colorado.
Northbound lanes of Highway 115 (aka South Nevada Ave.) are on federal land
- not subject to state court jurisdiction. Southbound lanes of Highway
115 (aka South Nevada Ave.) are in Colorado and are subject to state court
jurisdiction. Circumstance worthy of review: law enforcement
officer makes a traffic stop for speeding or other minor infraction along NB
Highway 115 and a DUI or DUR results - depending upon the location of the
alleged offense, jurisdiction may be an issue.
-
State court argument.
Highway 24 west of Manitou Springs. Some MSPD officers are deputized
as El Paso County Deputy Sheriffs, some not. When the CSP is busy in
Ute Pass, a dispatch may be referred to Manitou Springs PD for a reported
DUI on Highway 24. If the stop is slightly west of Cave of the Winds /
Cliff Dwellings, the circumstances are worthy of review. If the stop
is by a MSPD officer not deputized, and outside city limits,
extra-jurisdictional arrest has occurred. The City of Manitou Springs
also has a current official city map with a legend which allows locations to
be measured in feet.
-
Municipal court argument:
Woodmen Road or Highway 24 eastbound from Colorado Springs- same
circumstance as above. Some areas are city - some county. If
charged in municipal court, it's worth reviewing an official map to
determine whether the stop was in fact within city limits. City Water
Dept. has the most current official maps with a legend which allows
locations to be measured in feet.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
r.
THE FOLLOWING ARE NOT
GROUNDS FOR JURISDICTIONAL ATTACK. I’ve included in this section based upon
multiple inquiries about jurisdiction over the years.
-
UNLAWFUL
EXTRA-JURISDICTIONAL ARREST will not
affect the validity of the initial charging, however may be violative of a defendant’s rights
against unreasonable search and seizure under the United States and Colorado
Constitutions, violative of defendant’s rights to due process under the United
States and Colorado Constitutions, and violative of defendant’s statutory
rights.
If found to be a violation of constitutional rights, all
evidence would be subject to the exclusionary rule as fruits of the poisonous
tree Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963).
If all evidence
is suppressed, dismissal results.
FAILURE
TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF POINTS ON THE TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTY
NOTICE will not affect the validity of initial charging or court case
disposition, however may be used by defendant to
invalidate
points for DMV suspension, revocation or denial or may be used by
defendant as a
collateral
attack in a subsequent
driving
under restraint criminal charge. For information, refer to the
above links.
FAILURE TO APPEAR IN MUNICIPAL COURT - TRAFFIC INFRACTION PENALTY
NOTICE will not affect the validity of initial charging or court case
disposition, however may be used to
invalidate
points for DMV suspension, revocation or denial or may be used as a
collateral
attack in subsequent
driving
under restraint criminal charges. For information, refer to the
above links.
Except for bars to prosecution (statute of limitations and joinder) dismissals,
all dismissals would be without prejudice. Assuming the
Statute
of Limitations has not run, that means the prosecution (city or state)
may re-serve new summons and complaints or may cause the defendant to be
arrested on new charges. In the event of defective charging, at hearing it
is common practice for prosecutors to dismiss the fatally defective case and
have an officer present to re-serve or arrest the defendant on new
charges. Whether the new case has been properly commenced is another issue
- I've had one client charged improperly with 3 separate criminal cases arising
out of the same criminal episode, resulting in dismissals.
Gee
whiz, this seems much to do about nothing - why go to the effort and
expense? The state may not effect service or arrest within the Statute
of Limitations. For misdemeanor traffic offenses, that is one
year. For misdemeanors, including
DUI,
DEAC
or
DWAI, that is eighteen months. If they haven't
"gotcha" within the applicable period, the state is barred from
further prosecution. Classification
- refer to link for classification of offense.
In many circumstances, the facts of the case may not present well at a trial on
the merits. Dismissal short circuits prosecution. Dismissal upon
jurisdictional grounds is particularly appreciated by persons who have prior
offenses and may be facing jail.
|
NON-APPEARANCE OF DEFENDANT |
Ok, it makes sense to avoid service or arrest until
after the Statute of Limitations runs, but how do I avoid being re-served or arrested at
motions hearing?
If a defendant fails to appear, to avoid loss of jurisdiction the court must
issue a warrant for his / her arrest, and failure to appear is a class 2
misdemeanor traffic offense. CRS 42-4-1716. Additionally, if
defendant fails to appear, that can be considered waiver of claim and default
ruling, or the court may simply not rule until defendant appears. Seems to
be a problem, eh?
In many circumstances, litigants can appear by counsel. Counsel will enter
a written limited (special) appearance on behalf of defendant for the sole
purpose of contesting jurisdiction. The retainer agreement is drafted for
that limited purpose. Counsel is not the client's agent for service of
process in any other matter, including but not limited to new charges arising
out of the same criminal episode. Assuming dismissal is entered at
hearing, much to the chagrin of prosecutors or law enforcement officers, counsel
subsequently declines to accept service of new summons and complaints.
Immediately prior to hearing, it is common practice for prosecutors to demand
physical appearance of the defendant, with threat of demand for issuance of a
warrant and no future plea negotiations. In other words, cave in or the
state will come down upon you with all its wrath.
Hearing may be held on the issue of whether defendant is subject to arrest
warrant for failure to appear or default dismissal of the motion. I have
my client execute a waiver of appearance at jurisdictional attack motion
hearing, and file the waiver at the same time as filing the motion to dismiss
for lack of jurisdiction. I also file a brief on the merits and another
brief on the issue of appearance by counsel, but physical non-appearance.
It can get dicey - jurisdictional attacks frustrate prosecutors to no end.
But, that's what being a trial lawyer is all about - resolution of contested
issues. Having a meritorious claim and strong adversarial positions is the
fun part for defense attorneys, and I firmly believe every defendant has a right
to test a meritorious claim.
If the court dismisses the case for lack of jurisdiction, prosecutors may apply
for a warrant for the defendant's arrest on new charges arising from the same
criminal episode. Alternatively, a "want" may be placed in the
computers of the law enforcement agency. Either way, it is up to the state
to affect service or arrest within the
Statute
of Limitations. It would not be uncommon for the Deputy DA to make
demand upon law enforcement for immediate service or arrest. Service of
a new summons and complaint may also be achieved via certified U.S. Mail.
The old saying applies: "nothing good comes by certified
mail." Simply tell your postman you decline to accept and don't sign
anything. Yes, after careful advice, I've had a client sign "because
the postman was standing there." When you know it's not a plan - DOH
!!! - that's a Homer Simpson.
Through the years in prior cases, it has appeared the efforts die down after the
first 30-45 days, and the want or warrant simply lays in the law enforcement
agency computers waiting for a traffic stop or some other reason for
contact. The client is then left with necessity to avoid that contact - in
other words don't drive down Academy Blvd. at 90 miles per hour. It never
ceases to amaze me. I had 4 DUI dismissal clients return in the spring of
2003 who were stopped by and came into contact with police for frivolous traffic
reasons which could have been avoided with a little exercise of judgment and
care. When you know it's not a plan - DOH !!! - that's again a Homer
Simpson.
In practicality, home phone can be changed to non-published.
|
ADVERSE RULING - OPTIONS
WHAT CAN I DO IF I LOSE THE JURISDICTIONAL ATTACK? |
If the trial
court judge denies the motion to dismiss, a defendant has two
options.
1.) Proceed with the case on the merits -- negotiations on the merits (if the DA
Office will still negotiate) and perhaps contested proceedings (motion hearing,
readiness hearing and trial); or
2.) Request jurisdictional review from a higher court under C.R.Civ.P.
106(a)(4). Jurisdictional review was previously called Writ of
Prohibition, and is available where any governmental body or officer or any lower judicial body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion, and there is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy otherwise provided by
law. Review is limited to a determination of whether the body or officer has exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion, based on the evidence in the record before the defendant body or officer.
In layman's language: "drop back 10 and punt, or if at first you
don't succeed, try, try again."
This
type of decision is left to the client after advisement by counsel regarding
facts, applicable law and merits of the argument. My observation is that
clients have made the determination based upon potential sanctions if convicted
(multiple offender) and expense. Put another way - how important is it to
you?
|
ANSWERS TO FORESEEABLE QUESTIONS |
1. Is it worth while to read my summons and complaint(s)?
When retained, I take the time to
examine charging documents very carefully. You don't know what you will
find until you look.
2. If I secrete myself or remove myself from the State of
Colorado, will the
Statute
of Limitations be tolled (put on hold) for the
time I am hidden out or absent from this jurisdiction?
Yes. But, simply not answering your
doorbell or declining to produce yourself at police headquarters are not
sufficient to toll the
Statute
of Limitations.
3. Can the come by and give the summons to an adult living in
my residence?
Yes. If a Summons is issued by the
court, law enforcement officer(s) may serve the summons on an adult (age 18 or
over) resident if served at the residence, not his employment. Until the
Statute
of Limitations has run, don't answer the door unless you know who
is on the other side. Simply not answering your doorbell is not sufficient to
toll the Statute
of Limitations.
4. Can the law enforcement agency serve a new summons and
complaint upon me if I am outside the county or outside the state?
a. Outside the county in which
charges were brought. Yes. It would be necessary for the officer(s) to obtain
assistance of the local law enforcement. However, the typical scenario would be
that you are stopped for speeding or another traffic infraction by a local law
enforcement officer, he finds the pick up in the computers, takes you to the
local jail & a hold is placed until law enforcement officer(s) from the
county in which original charges were brought can come get you.
b. Outside Colorado. Yes. The law
enforcement officer(s) would be required to input this into the NCIC records
(FBI national). If you were stopped in another state, an extradition would be
required. I've only defended one DUI extradition in 25+ years of practice. To my
knowledge, no other defense attorney, prosecutor or judge other than the judge
in that case has seen a DUI extradition not tagged to a felony. It would be most
unusual.
5. What about a DMV license revocation hearing; can the law
enforcement officer(s) serve me there?
Absolutely.
I am always adamant that clients
request a hearing within the 7 day statute of limitation. By requesting a
hearing, you preserve your options but are not bound. The law enforcement
officer(s) will likely make it a point to appear at the DMV in hopes of
re-serving you. If you attend the DMV hearing, you will most likely be served a
new set of summons and complaint(s) which the law enforcement officer(s) will
likely immediately file with the court - thus initiating new and possibly valid
prosecution.
Clients have 2 options.
OPTION 1. Not appear the DMV hearing, not retain counsel for appearance and lose
the license for 3 months if a first DMV revocation for excessive alcohol or for
one year if a second or subsequent DMV revocation for excessive alcohol or one
year for refusing a chemical test. There is no time limitation on the prior
revocation to be considered second or subsequent. To become reinstated, SR-22
insurance would be required for 3 months if a first revocation, 3 years if a
second or subsequent. SR-22 insurance may be procured from Farmer's Insurance,
American Family, or through any number of independent insurance agents who
represent multiple companies. Check prices at different companies at SR-22 is
usually expensive.
OPTION 2. Retain an attorney to appear at the DMV hearing without your physical
appearance. The DMV hearing officer may rule against you as a default absent
good explanation why you can't appear, however it would be counsel's argument
that appearance by counsel is sufficient to go forward with the hearing. That
argument has been successful in the past. Counsel would also advise the that he
or she has been retained for the limited purpose of DMV representation and is
not a general agent for service of process. Given the likelihood of the law
enforcement officer(s)' appearance, and the BAC state / re-test / variance
within the 2 hours statutory window, the license may be lost even with
appearance of counsel.
OPTION
RECOMMENDATION. Retain counsel - it need not be me but could be a
different attorney. If the law enforcement officer(s) fail(s) to appear, you
will have saved significant SR-22 insurance premiums and a license revocation.
If revoked and you were to drive again, refer to my primary website
Driving
Under Restraint page..
6. I am considering attendance at an
Inpatient
Treatment Facility. Would they be able to serve it to me while I am there?
Yes. However it is unlikely that law
enforcement officer(s) would have information as to admittance and therefore
would not know your whereabouts.
Caveat. It would be a different
ballgame if you were to attend a local
State
Certified Alcohol Class. Much as I would hope it wouldn't happen,
local alcohol education counselors may very well call the local law enforcement
agency and let them know when you will be present. People get to know one
another in any given town. Probably isn't a plan to enroll in a local
State
Certified Alcohol Class.
AA
Meetings attendance. You
bet. It's not likely anyone there feels a great affinity for and need to
contact local law enforcement.
7. If not filed at the time of 1st appearance and
filing was denied for failure to timely file, was this case dismissed?
Not technically a dismissal, but yes. Law enforcement
officer(s) is / are precluded from filing the initial set summons and
complaints. Therefore no criminal prosecution will ever be initiated. Because
counsel is present in a limited (special) appearance, not the person charged,
the law enforcement officer are unable to serve a new set of tickets to initiate
a correct prosecution. It's a dead issue unless there is proper service
within the Statute
of Limitations.
|
DO
I NEED AN ATTORNEY?
Are prosecutors concerned with their
statistics? |
|
|
|
Do I need an attorney?
|
Probably time to loosen the pocket book and
hire a
defense attorney.
|
|
You need not retain my services, but hire counsel.
|
Self help goes a long way, but you can't do this one yourself. If you wish
to pursue a jurisdictional attack, an attorney is an absolute necessity.
Absent counsel, the defendant must personally appear at hearing on the motion to
dismiss, at which time service of new summons and complaint(s) or arrest on new
charges arising from the same criminal episode would be certain to occur.
Pro se motion would have been a nullity, simply aggravating prosecutors.
At the time of the first
visit, a prospective client will be quoted attorney's fees and estimated costs. The quote will
be honored for a period of seven (7) days, after which it is subject to change
without notice if this office has not been retained. Attorney is a sole
practitioner with need to manage his caseload. Pending proposed client
acceptance and payment, retainer agreement proposals are subject to
withdrawal. Attorney reserves the right to decline any case.
In most circumstances, attorney initially makes an option offer of 1.) billing
to be upon hourly fees, or in the alternative, 2.) quote of a flat fee through
trial court final hearing on jurisdictional attack.
ELECTION.
Offered fee options will be up to the client, however client's initial election will be
final.
Included in attorney's primary website is a
web page devoted to clear definition & understanding of free
first
consultation, fees and costs, retainer agreement and terms of
representation. Additional
information regarding fees & costs may be found via the links
following potential quotes..
POTENTIAL
FEE QUOTE
JURISDICTIONAL ATTACK
FEE OPTION 1 |
|
|
HOURLY
FEE RATE |
|
I generally
offer hourly fees or a hearing - final ruling flat fee. The hearing flat fee would
be dependent upon the facts and circumstances of the case and legal issues, however
the above
would be a common quote. This shall neither constitute an offer, nor
be construed as a binding estimate.
|
|
|
trust deposit request
regarding fees & costs |
|
|
In
the event jurisdictional attack is successful, the case is
dismissed without prejudice.
Dismissal
- Then What?
|
|
In
the event jurisdictional attack is not successful or the client
is re-served with new charges, the case proceeds. Refer to
substantive
charges
re fees.
|
| |
PAYMENT
FEE OPTION 1
Secure
On-Line Payment
|
|
Prior to commencement of
representation, the attorney will quote the amount requested as a trust
deposit against which attorney's fees and costs may be billed. The
requested trust
deposit will be dependent upon the facts and
circumstances of your case.
|
|
jurisdictional
attack - option 1
*
this
shall not constitute an offer, nor be construed as a binding
estimate |
|
|
Client authorization
is obtained
for any large cost expense. Final expenditure may run less or
client
may periodically be asked for additional amounts to be deposited to trust if
fees and costs will exceed previous deposits. |
Client
will be provided with a trust accounting and itemized
billing statement when there has been activity on the account. At the end of
each case, a detailed accounting summary is provided and
remaining trust proceeds are refunded. |
|
trust
deposit for anticipated fees & costs is due when
retained |
|
attorney does not accept installment payments |
|
|
|
|
|
regular billings are
scheduled on the 1st and 15th
payment not received
as agreed = representation withdrawn |
|
|
|
|
|
PARTIAL LIST OF POTENTIAL
COSTS
out of pocket costs are the responsibility of the
client |
|
|
|
e-Filing
availability and court mandatory requirements |
litigation costs
fluctuate - not within attorney control
costs change & below cost information may be
obsolete |
|
|
|
|
COLORADO STATE COURT WEBSITE |
| link to Colorado
Judicial Branch website - current costs |
|
|
|
CRIMINAL & TRAFFIC COURT COSTS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CAVEAT:
Not all above costs will be relevant to any given case, and additional
expenses not identified may be incurred in any individual case.
Costs quoted are subject to change by independent providers; actual costs
paid will be billed. limited
search
pricing |
| |
*
* *
* *
* *
*
POTENTIAL
FEE QUOTE
JURISDICTIONAL ATTACK
FEE OPTION 2 |
|
|
HOURLY
FEE RATE |
|
I offer a second option for hearing flat fee which is related to
an offer of future
pro-bono representation in the event of either motion denial or the client receives
service of new summons and complaint(s) or is arrested on new charges
arising from the same criminal episode within 90 days from dismissal. If jurisdictional attack may
apply to your case, I am most willing to discuss each flat fee and the
differences. Hourly fees remain another option.
|
In
the event jurisdictional attack is successful, the case is
dismissed without prejudice.
Dismissal
- Then What?
|
|
trust deposit request
regarding fees & costs
|
|
| |
PAYMENT
FEE OPTION 2
Secure
On-Line Payment
|
|
Prior to commencement of
representation, the attorney will quote the amount requested as a trust
deposit against which attorney's fees and costs may be billed. The
requested trust
deposit will be dependent upon the facts and
circumstances of your case.
|
|
jurisdictional
attack - option 2
*
this
shall not constitute an offer, nor be construed as a binding
estimate |
|
|
Client authorization
is obtained
for any large cost expense. Final expenditure may run less or
client
may periodically be asked for additional amounts to be deposited to trust if
fees and costs will exceed previous deposits. |
Client
will be provided with a trust accounting and itemized
billing statement when there has been activity on the account. At the end of
each case, a detailed accounting summary is provided and
remaining trust proceeds are refunded. |
|
| |
