ARTICLE 3 DEPENDENCY AND NEGLECT

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

ARTICLE 3 DEPENDENCY AND NEGLECT

Editor's note: This title was repealed and reenacted in 1987. For historical information concerning the repeal and reenactment, see the editor's note following the title heading.

Law reviews: For comment, "The Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978: Protecting Essential Tribal Interests", see 60 U. Colo. L. Rev. 131 (1989); for article, "Representing Foster Parents in Dependency and Neglect Proceedings", see 22 Colo. Law. 1697 (1993); for article, "Dependency and Neglect Law: New Legislation and Case Law", see 35 Colo. Law. 79 (Sept. 2006); for article, "Colorado's Family-Integrated Problem-Solving Courts" see 42 Colo. Law. 75 (Nov. 2013); for article, "Representing Respondent Parents: Measuring the Impact of the ORPC", see 46 Colo. Law. 34 (Dec. 2017).

PART 2 GENERAL PROVISIONS

19-3-207. Inadmissibility of certain evidence. (1) Upon the request of the county attorney, special county attorney, or the city attorney of a city and county, the court shall set a hearing to determine the admissibility in a subsequent criminal proceeding arising from the same episode of information derived directly from testimony obtained pursuant to compulsory process in a proceeding under this article. The district attorney of the judicial district in which the matter is being heard shall be given five days' written notice of the hearing by the clerk of the court. Such hearing shall be held in camera, and the district attorney shall have the right to appear at the hearing and to object to the entry of the order holding such information inadmissible. The court shall not enter such an order if the district attorney presents prima facie evidence that the inadmissibility of such information would substantially impair his or her ability to prosecute the criminal case. The provisions of this subsection (1) shall not be construed to prevent any law enforcement officer from independently producing or obtaining the same or similar facts, information, or evidence for use in any criminal prosecution.

(2) No professional shall be examined in any criminal case without the consent of the respondent as to statements made pursuant to compliance with court treatment orders, including protective orders, entered under this article; except that such privilege shall not apply to any discussion of any future misconduct or of any other past misconduct unrelated to the allegations involved in the treatment plan. The admissibility of testimony as set forth in this subsection (2) shall not be subject to the hearing and notice provisions of subsection (1) of this section.

(2.5) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, a juvenile's statements to a professional made in the course of treatment ordered by the court pursuant to this article shall...