 |
|
Response to Defendant's Petition to Show Cause - From G. Jacobson, City Atty
THORNTON MUNICIPAL COURT, COUNTY OF ADAMS, STATE OF COLORADOPEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, EX REL, THE CITY OF THORNTON,
Plaintiff
Versus
STANLEY, RICHARD E.,
Defendant(s):
_____________________________________________
Gary G. Jacobson
City of Thornton
9500 Civic Center Drive
Thornton, Colorado 80229-4326
(303) 538-7210
(303) 538-7427 (fax)
e-mail: gary.jacobson@cityofthornton.net
Atty. Reg. #: 14787
Case No. CR-2002-0006386-MS
Ticket No.: 6006790
Response to Defendant’s Petition to Show
Cause Where This Court Has Jurisdiction
COMES NOW, the City of Thornton, by and through its Prosecuting Attorney, Gary
G. Jacobson, and hereby responds to the Defendant’s Petition that challenges
that this Court has Jurisdiction, and states as follows:
AUTHORITY OT ESTABLISH A MUNINCIPAL COURT
Pursuant to Article XX, Section 6 of the Colorado Constitution, the people
of each city and town in the state, having populations in accordance with that
section may form a home-rule municipality by promulgation of a charter and ordinances
that shall supersede within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of such
city or town any law of the state in conflict therewith.
Pursuant to the provisions of the aforementioned Colorado Constitution, the
City of Thornton (“City”) established a charter that was approved
by the citizens of Thornton in June of 1967 which charter was adopted in July
of 1967.
Pursuant to Section 6-1 of the Thornton City Charter (“Charter”),
the Municipal court is a municipal court of record ad is therefore authorized
and has jurisdiction to hear and determine all cases arising under said charter
or the ordinances of the City.
Section 8-1 of the Charter authorizes the promulgation of ordinances that regulate
the conduct of citizens within the municipal boundaries and in conjunction with
C.R.S. 31-15-401, the City has the authority to use its police power to regulate
the conduct of persons within its jurisdictional boundaries, for the public
health and welfare.
Pursuant to the authority to promulgate ordinances, the City has promulgated
Chapter 38 of the Thornton City Code, as an exercise of its police power, to
regulate the conduct of persons within the jurisdiction, and pursuant to Section
1-8 of the Thornton City Code, the City is authorized to punish persons who
plead guilty or are found guilty of violating any such ordinance.
Further, as a home-rule municipality, the City operates its municipal court
pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Thornton City Code, which authorizes, pursuant
to 14-8, of said Thornton City Code, the issuances of summonses in accordance
with the procedures established by Section 14-10, authorizes Initiation of Prosecutions,
which procedures follow the Colorado Rules of Municipal Procedure.
The City does not invoke any federal jurisdictional power or state legislative
power for its enforcement of municipal ordinance that are matters of purely
local concern. The City and County of Denver v. Sweet, 329 P.2d 441 (1958),
simply recognizes the overlapping interests in certain circumstances, of cities
and the state and notes the preemptory power of the state in matters of statewide
concern, specifically concerning taxation, which is not applicable to the case
at bar.
The municipal summons in this case was issued pursuant to the Colorado Rules
of Municipal Procedure invoking the specific provisions of the Thornton City
Code, specifically Section 38-237, which enforcement is a matter of purely local
concern.
II. PENALTIES
As previously indicated, penalties are established pursuant to Section 1-8 of the Thornton City Code and are imposed upon a finding or pleading of guilty or nolo contendere to a municipal ordinance violation. AS the posture of this case is such that a ruling by the Municipal Court Judge has not yet been entered, a determination of the issue of appropriateness of fines is not relevant at this stage of the proceedings.
III. JURISDICTION
As previously noted, the Thornton Municipal Court has the authority to impose penalties and determine, pursuant to the aforementioned Charter provisions, whether or not a municipal ordinance is violated. Pursuant to Charter provision 5.9 the City Attorney’s Office has the power to prosecute violations of such ordinances which occur within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City. It is incumbent upon the prosecution to establish that the violation in question did occur by a person, specifically identified, who was at the time of the alleged violation actually within the City’s jurisdictional limits. The jurisdictional police powers of the Thornton Municipal Court is invoked when a summons alleges the foregoing, which facts will be established at trial.
WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the City respectfully requests that the Defendant’s Petition, objection to the Court’s jurisdiction be DENIED.
DATED this 16th day of January, 2003
Respectfully Submitted
By: __________________________________
Gary G. Jacobson
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S PETITION TO SHOW CAUSE WHERE THIS COURT HAS JURISDICTION has been placed in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, this 16th day of January, 2003, and mailed to:
Rick Stanley
6280 E. 39th Avenue
Denver, CO 80207
By: Diane Rushaeys
|
Email Rick Stanley at rick@stanley2002.org |