 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People7/28/2005
aw from representing criminal defendant in his appeal concerning post-conviction claim that another public defender provided ineffective assistance at trial); Anderson Calder & Lembke v. Dist. Court, 629 P.2d 603 (Colo. 1981)(attorneys sought writ of prohibition directing district court to grant them leave to withdraw from representation of defendant in pending criminal case); see also DeLisio v. Alaska Superior Court, 740 P.2d 437 (Alaska 1987)(attorney appealed order finding him in contempt after he refused court appointment to represent indigent criminal defendant without compensation); Cunningham v. Superior Court, 177 Cal. App. 3d 336, 222 Cal. Rptr. 854 (1986)(attorney appealed order holding him in contempt after he refused to comply with order to represent indigent defendant in paternity action); State ex rel. Scott v. Roper, 688 S.W.2d 757 (Mo. 1985)(attorney brought action to prohibit court from appointing him to represent indigent prison inmate as plaintiff in medical malpractice action); Jewell v. Maynard, 181 W. Va. 571, 383 S.E.2d 536 (1989)(attorney brought an original action to prohibit court from appointing him to represent indigent criminal defendants without just compensation).
Therefore, counsel has standing to raise his claim.
B.
Because the trial court did not make any factual findings or otherwise explain the reason for its determination, we have no basis for conducting a meaningful review of the ruling, and we cannot make factual findings of our own. For example, counsel indicated in his motion that he was previously under contract with the state to represent indigent respondent parents in dependency and neglect cases, but that he was no longer accepting such appointments. But nothing in the trial court's order or the record before us addresses whether counsel's contract with the state was still in effect when counsel decided not to accept further appointments and, if so, whether the contract permitted counsel to refuse to accept appointments or withdraw from the contract at any time.
Accordingly, we remand the case to the trial court with directions to reconsider counsel's motion and enter an order in which it makes factual findings and explains the basis for its ruling. See People v. D.F., 933 P.2d 9 (Colo. 1997)(when appellate review is hindered by the absence of factual findings as to key contested issues, or when unresolved evidentiary conflicts exist with regard to material facts, appellate court may remand for further fact finding by the trial court); In re Marriage of Goodbinder, ___ P.3d ___ (Colo. App. No. 03CA2111, June 30, 2005)(same). In doing so, the court should consider counsel's legal arguments and determine the motion before taking further action concerning a dispositional order. However, counsel shall continue to represent mother in the proceeding pending determination of his motion.
The dispositional order is vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
JUDGE LOEB and JUDGE STERNBERG concur.
Page 1 2 3 Colorado Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|