Gunnison County District Court No. 17JD8 Honorable J. Steven
Patrick, Judge.
Philip
J. Weiser, Attorney General, Gabriel P. Olivares, Assistant
Attorney General, Denver, Colorado, for Petitioner-Appellee
Tara
Jorfald, Alternate Defense Counsel, Lakewood, Colorado, for
Juvenile-Appellant
OPINION
RICHMAN JUDGE.
¶
1 The juvenile, J.V.D., appeals his delinquency adjudication
on a charge of first degree criminal trespass. Because we
agree with him that his right to counsel was violated when he
proceeded without representation despite no valid waiver of
that right, we reverse the adjudication.
I.
Background
¶
2 According to the prosecution's evidence, J.V.D., then
sixteen years old, opened the window of his neighbor's
trailer, but left after the neighbor's face appeared in
the window.
¶
3 Nearly six months later, J.V.D. received a notice to appear
concerning an allegation of second degree criminal trespass -
a class 3 misdemeanor. He appeared at the hearing with his
mother. There, the juvenile court advised them, as relevant
here, (1) of the allegation of second degree trespass; (2)
that if he pleaded guilty or was found guilty at trial, he
could be sentenced to the Department of Youth Corrections;
and (3) that he had the right to be represented by counsel
and that a public defender would be appointed if he was
financially qualified. J.V.D. asked the court if he could
represent himself. After cautioning him that the proceedings
could be complicated and that he might get bad advice from a
nonlawyer, it responded that he had the right to represent
himself.
¶
4 J.V.D. proceeded to debate his Sixth Amendment right to a
jury trial with the juvenile court, and it advised him
repeatedly that he was "getting bad advice." The
court offered to appoint a guardian ad litem (GAL), and
J.V.D. declined. As the court attempted to conclude the
proceedings, J.V.D. asked whether the case was a civil or
criminal action. The court briefly explained that a juvenile
delinquency case was neither civil nor criminal but was
analogous to a criminal case, and it repeated its caution
against getting legal advice from nonlawyers.
¶
5 A week later, the prosecution filed a delinquency petition
charging first degree criminal trespass, a class 5 felony,
not the second degree trespass about which J.V.D. had been
advised. A copy of the petition was mailed to J.V.D.'s
mother, but the envelope was returned unclaimed.
¶
6 At the plea hearing, J.V.D. stated that he did not wish to
enter a plea until some of his questions were answered. He
asked for information on the nature and cause of the action,
whether the action was civil or criminal, and "for the
rule-book - the regulations, the rules, the codes, the
statutes - in order for me to intelligently defend
myself."
¶
7 The juvenile court suggested that perhaps he should have an
attorney, but J.V.D. said that he was not looking for legal
advice. The prosecutor asked for a GAL to be appointed.
J.V.D. objected, and his mother agreed that a GAL was not
necessary. The court did not appoint a GAL.
¶
8 J.V.D. pressed the court regarding his questions. The court
told him that he had been informed of the nature of the
proceeding, directed him to go to the library to find the
relevant information, deemed his actions to be a denial of
the petition, and set the matter for trial.[1] J.V.D. repeatedly
objected to the involuntary entry of a plea. The matter was
set for trial six weeks later.
¶
9 At the outset of trial, J.V.D. "totally object[ed] to
the proceeding" because he did not "know the full
nature and cause," and he had been unprepared to enter a
plea. The juvenile court took a few moments to explain
jurisdiction and then proceeded with the trial.
¶
10 J.V.D. acted pro se at trial, though he was also
represented by his mother.[2] He was not invited to give an opening
statement, and he did not testify or call any witnesses,
though he claimed that he had an alibi. His mother made some
objections, asked some questions on cross-examination, and
made closing arguments. Both J.V.D. and his mother made clear
that they had not accessed any of the exhibits or the police
report before trial.[3]
¶
11 The juvenile court adjudicated J.V.D. delinquent. Due in
part to two prior adjudications for possession/consumption of
marijuana and misdemeanor criminal mischief - each of which
had resulted in a plea agreement - the court sentenced him to
one to two years in the custody of the Department of Youth
Corrections.
¶
12 J.V.D. is represented by counsel on appeal. He contends
that he did not effectively waive his right ...