Making a long story short, in Colorado my wife and I cared for a child not our own under protection of a Power of Attorney for a year (child age 1.5-2.5). When it became evident the mother of the child (certainly dangerous at best to the child's health and well being) was looking to revoke the POA, Human Services (HS) got involved. HS desired to leave the child with us, to work towards certification as foster parents, but for the protection of the child we asked they place the child elsewhere (it was a hard decision, but by far the right one....the mother knows where we live and already talked of kidnapping).
We were summoned, threatened with potential warrants if we didn't appear, and listed as special respondents. Naturally, we appeared. The fact that the child wasn't with us at the time of the hearing (child was with a foster family by that point) made the Asst. County Attorney agree to our own request that we be removed as Special Respondents and she asked the judge on that first hearing to do so. We requested this out of ignorance and fear (details can be provided if desired)We requested this for several reasons. The judge took us off as special respondents after simply asking us. We were not informed of what special respondent meant, what the ramifications to being taken off were, or that we could have legal counsel (nor asked if we did have legal counsel). This immediately cut us out of the loop even though we still maintain a relationship with the child through the foster family (we speak to her at least weekly and see her about once every 2-3 weeks at her home, our home, and outside events and we encourage her native american heritage at local events)
Now, however, the respondent mother has signed a TPR (yet to be ruled on by the court os of course, it is not effective) and the child's only representation is with the GAL. We do NOT wish to be a placement option, but we do desire to speak on her behalf as one of the few people that actually know her and we want to be able to be notified of hearing dates (even though they are public info, they are not in the public domain). At the last hearing, I stood and addressed the magistrate asking to be re-established as special respondents. His decision was that we file a motion (which we didn't have to do in order to get us removed, it was simply and quickly done).
Now, as we don't have money for any of this, we are filing pro se (and asking to do so without payment). I have found several areas where the procedure (both court rules and Colorado Revised Statutes) regarding the case seem to have been violated as it applies to our removal as special respondents (and with the original summons). Basically, they all fall into the category of: The rules/CRS require a statement about legal representation availability in the summons and we were robbed of the right to have legal representation (or knowledge that we could). There was no such statement (or the associative other rules violated as a result) made by ANY participants in the case. The respondent mother of course was offered, but we were not. We were simply asked by the magistrate if we agreed to be taken off as special respondents, never asked if we were going pro se, nor asked if we wanted to obtain legal counsel.
Anyway, those aren't my questions. I believe I can get us re-added based on the CRS and court rules violations alone along with the ability to show the judge we are still in the child's life and have significant experience with the child to warrant being special respondents in the first place. However, I'm struggling with whether or not we SHOULD file the motion. I realize that's asking a loaded question, and only my wife and I can determine if we should, but there are several questions that, when answered, will help us determine our own best course of action. Most of these questions are geared towards whether filing the motion can be harmful to the child or the existing legal process protecting her at the moment. So if you can answer some of these, that would be most helpful to my decision making process. BTW, the hearing for this "motion to modify special respondents" is already set and it predates the TPR hearing by a month so there would be plenty of legal manuevering time by other parties if they are so inclined. This timing/availability I believe is of the utmost importance to the questions at hand.
1) Assuming I am correct and the judge agrees with me that we were robbed of legal representation, could the primary respondent mother also use this information (as she would not have been informed in the summons as well) to have the case thrown out, alter the current environment of the case, or otherwise do something that might make it possible for her to have the child returned to her or the case thrown into a serious tailspin in some manner?
2) Would being a special respondent on this case entitle my wife and I to receive notifications of any other cases that might apply to this case (for example maternal grandma of the child filed a separate case with the child as an interested party, but not listing my wife and I)? This is very likely to happen.
3) Does being a special respondent entitle my wife and I to participate in the final disposition of the child at some point (i.e. enable us to voice our opinion on where the child should go....we know this is only an opinion)?
4) Is there any culpability that arises out of simply being a special
respondent (beyond a Human Services treatment plan which I don't believe will apply to us because we are not and don't desire to become day-to-day caretakers of of the child, but I understand it may be desired if we are to be regular visitors of the child)
5) Is there any sort of disruption that could arise out of this motion which I might not be aware of such as the potential to remove any of the key players from the environment (the magistrate, County Attorney, HS, GAL, respondent mother's attorney, etc) if it is found that the proper procedures were not followed in issuing the summons or followed in the courtroom?
6) We will be taking this task on Pro Se because quite frankly we are struggling financially. We cannot afford even the filing fees. Now I've filled out the form for the request to waive the filing fees, but the form doesn't have a place to put the motion on it. I'm not sure if this means we file both the motion without payment and the motion to modify special respondents with the court, or if I'm supposed to extend the "Motion to file without payment" to include the narrative I would use in the "motion to modify special respondents". If I file both as separate documents, I am presuming (due to the fact that the motion to file without payment does not contain the same "certificate of mailing" as the motion to modify does) that this motion to file without payment does not need to be sent to all parties in the case, but I'd like to be certain. I've looked for self-help instructions for this court and there are none past the forms and a brief Pro Se document talking about things like court etiquette and being a good winner/loser.
7) What exactly does a "special respondent" status allow? Does it allow full access to court documents? Does it allow full access to Human Services documentation? What about access to tribal documentation regarding the case (the tribe has issued a motion to intervene)? When will we be likely asked to provide our voice on the placement of the child? Would we be entitled to sit at the defense table for each hearing and provide our opinions on matters (for instance, when Human Svcs makes a recommendation on concurrent paths of adoption and reunification with the mother, the County attorney voices opinion, as does the GAL, HS, the mother's attorney, so would we likewise be able to voice our opinion at that point?)
8) Does making us participants in the case allow us to speak with all other participants in the case about the case? In particular, I'm speaking about the indian tribe representatives.
I know this is a lot of information to digest, especially for a board of this type, but there's so little information available about pro se that isn't so generalized as to prove mostly useless and there's much less information about "special respondent" status. I've done as much legal legwork as I can do, but most of these questions are questions of "what if" that really aren't answered in the legal books or online materials, they are gathered through courtroom experience (which is a crapshoot even if I get a lawyer who specializes in these types ofcases, I'm sure very few have dealt with this exact situation).
I have our motions prepared along with the legal references, I just need to make sure we're not doing anything that could potentially place the child in harms way by filing it. All my wife and I want to do is to protect this child as best we can. Secondarily, we'd like to be able to participate in the process much more than we have been allowed to date as we believe it in the best interest of the child.
The hearing on this matter is the 7th of next month (we were just told last week about filing a motion) and since we have to give 10 days for notification as we understand it, it would be most appreciated if any of these questions can be answered as quickly as possible.
Thanks again in advance.
We were summoned, threatened with potential warrants if we didn't appear, and listed as special respondents. Naturally, we appeared. The fact that the child wasn't with us at the time of the hearing (child was with a foster family by that point) made the Asst. County Attorney agree to our own request that we be removed as Special Respondents and she asked the judge on that first hearing to do so. We requested this out of ignorance and fear (details can be provided if desired)We requested this for several reasons. The judge took us off as special respondents after simply asking us. We were not informed of what special respondent meant, what the ramifications to being taken off were, or that we could have legal counsel (nor asked if we did have legal counsel). This immediately cut us out of the loop even though we still maintain a relationship with the child through the foster family (we speak to her at least weekly and see her about once every 2-3 weeks at her home, our home, and outside events and we encourage her native american heritage at local events)
Now, however, the respondent mother has signed a TPR (yet to be ruled on by the court os of course, it is not effective) and the child's only representation is with the GAL. We do NOT wish to be a placement option, but we do desire to speak on her behalf as one of the few people that actually know her and we want to be able to be notified of hearing dates (even though they are public info, they are not in the public domain). At the last hearing, I stood and addressed the magistrate asking to be re-established as special respondents. His decision was that we file a motion (which we didn't have to do in order to get us removed, it was simply and quickly done).
Now, as we don't have money for any of this, we are filing pro se (and asking to do so without payment). I have found several areas where the procedure (both court rules and Colorado Revised Statutes) regarding the case seem to have been violated as it applies to our removal as special respondents (and with the original summons). Basically, they all fall into the category of: The rules/CRS require a statement about legal representation availability in the summons and we were robbed of the right to have legal representation (or knowledge that we could). There was no such statement (or the associative other rules violated as a result) made by ANY participants in the case. The respondent mother of course was offered, but we were not. We were simply asked by the magistrate if we agreed to be taken off as special respondents, never asked if we were going pro se, nor asked if we wanted to obtain legal counsel.
Anyway, those aren't my questions. I believe I can get us re-added based on the CRS and court rules violations alone along with the ability to show the judge we are still in the child's life and have significant experience with the child to warrant being special respondents in the first place. However, I'm struggling with whether or not we SHOULD file the motion. I realize that's asking a loaded question, and only my wife and I can determine if we should, but there are several questions that, when answered, will help us determine our own best course of action. Most of these questions are geared towards whether filing the motion can be harmful to the child or the existing legal process protecting her at the moment. So if you can answer some of these, that would be most helpful to my decision making process. BTW, the hearing for this "motion to modify special respondents" is already set and it predates the TPR hearing by a month so there would be plenty of legal manuevering time by other parties if they are so inclined. This timing/availability I believe is of the utmost importance to the questions at hand.
1) Assuming I am correct and the judge agrees with me that we were robbed of legal representation, could the primary respondent mother also use this information (as she would not have been informed in the summons as well) to have the case thrown out, alter the current environment of the case, or otherwise do something that might make it possible for her to have the child returned to her or the case thrown into a serious tailspin in some manner?
2) Would being a special respondent on this case entitle my wife and I to receive notifications of any other cases that might apply to this case (for example maternal grandma of the child filed a separate case with the child as an interested party, but not listing my wife and I)? This is very likely to happen.
3) Does being a special respondent entitle my wife and I to participate in the final disposition of the child at some point (i.e. enable us to voice our opinion on where the child should go....we know this is only an opinion)?
4) Is there any culpability that arises out of simply being a special
respondent (beyond a Human Services treatment plan which I don't believe will apply to us because we are not and don't desire to become day-to-day caretakers of of the child, but I understand it may be desired if we are to be regular visitors of the child)
5) Is there any sort of disruption that could arise out of this motion which I might not be aware of such as the potential to remove any of the key players from the environment (the magistrate, County Attorney, HS, GAL, respondent mother's attorney, etc) if it is found that the proper procedures were not followed in issuing the summons or followed in the courtroom?
6) We will be taking this task on Pro Se because quite frankly we are struggling financially. We cannot afford even the filing fees. Now I've filled out the form for the request to waive the filing fees, but the form doesn't have a place to put the motion on it. I'm not sure if this means we file both the motion without payment and the motion to modify special respondents with the court, or if I'm supposed to extend the "Motion to file without payment" to include the narrative I would use in the "motion to modify special respondents". If I file both as separate documents, I am presuming (due to the fact that the motion to file without payment does not contain the same "certificate of mailing" as the motion to modify does) that this motion to file without payment does not need to be sent to all parties in the case, but I'd like to be certain. I've looked for self-help instructions for this court and there are none past the forms and a brief Pro Se document talking about things like court etiquette and being a good winner/loser.
7) What exactly does a "special respondent" status allow? Does it allow full access to court documents? Does it allow full access to Human Services documentation? What about access to tribal documentation regarding the case (the tribe has issued a motion to intervene)? When will we be likely asked to provide our voice on the placement of the child? Would we be entitled to sit at the defense table for each hearing and provide our opinions on matters (for instance, when Human Svcs makes a recommendation on concurrent paths of adoption and reunification with the mother, the County attorney voices opinion, as does the GAL, HS, the mother's attorney, so would we likewise be able to voice our opinion at that point?)
8) Does making us participants in the case allow us to speak with all other participants in the case about the case? In particular, I'm speaking about the indian tribe representatives.
I know this is a lot of information to digest, especially for a board of this type, but there's so little information available about pro se that isn't so generalized as to prove mostly useless and there's much less information about "special respondent" status. I've done as much legal legwork as I can do, but most of these questions are questions of "what if" that really aren't answered in the legal books or online materials, they are gathered through courtroom experience (which is a crapshoot even if I get a lawyer who specializes in these types ofcases, I'm sure very few have dealt with this exact situation).
I have our motions prepared along with the legal references, I just need to make sure we're not doing anything that could potentially place the child in harms way by filing it. All my wife and I want to do is to protect this child as best we can. Secondarily, we'd like to be able to participate in the process much more than we have been allowed to date as we believe it in the best interest of the child.
The hearing on this matter is the 7th of next month (we were just told last week about filing a motion) and since we have to give 10 days for notification as we understand it, it would be most appreciated if any of these questions can be answered as quickly as possible.
Thanks again in advance.
