DISTRICT COURT, ADAMS COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO
1100 Judicial Center Drive
Brighton, CO 80601
Phone Number: (303) 659-1161
Appeal from the Thornton Municipal Court,
Case No. 02CR6386, The Hon. Mary J. Dulacki
Plaintiff - Appellee:
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO ex rel. THE CITY OF THORNTON
? COURT USE ONLY ?
Defendant - Appellant:
RICHARD E. STANLEY
Case Number:
THE REISCH LAW FIRM, LLC
R. Scott Reisch
Stacey L. Ross
370 Seventeenth Street, Suite 4970 Div.: Ctrm.:
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: (303) 291-0555
FAX Number: (720) 904-5797
E-mail: rscottreisch@worldnet.att.net
Atty. Reg. No.: 26892
Atty. Reg. No.: 20823
MOTION FOR RECUSAL
COMES NOW the defendant - appellant, Richard E. Stanley (hereinafter "defendant"), by and through his
attorneys, the Reisch Law Firm, LLC, and hereby Moves for Recusal of all Adams County Judges, pursuant
to C.R.S. § 16-6-201. In support of this Motion the Defendant offers the following:
1. On January 29, 2003, defendant was found guilty after a bench trial in Thornton Municipal Court of
possessing a dangerous weapon. (Thornton Municipal Case 02 CR 6386, Judge Rose presiding). He timely
appealed to the Adams County District Court (Case No. 03CV533). His conviction was affirmed on August
26, 2003, by the Adams County District Court Judge Donald Marshall.
2. Defendant has now been charged with attempting to influence a public official in violation of
C.R.S. § 18-8-306, based on defendant's alleged transmission of veiled threats to the two judicial
officers who presided over his bench trial and appeal-the Honorable Judge Donald Marshall of the Adams
County District Court and the Honorable Charles Rose of the Thornton Municipal Court.
3. Judges Marshall and Rose are likely to be called as witnesses against the defendant when
defendant's felony case goes to trial. Defendant moved to disqualify all of the judges of the
Adams County Court on grounds of appearance of impropriety, given that two of their fellow judges
were named victims in the felony case and all judges of the Adams County Court received a copy of
Judge Marshall's opinion affirming defendant's Thornton conviction. See Exhibit A (attached).
4. Defendant's motion was granted and retired Colorado Supreme Court Justice Quinn has now been
assigned to preside over defendant's pending felony case.
5. Meanwhile, defendant filed a motion for post-conviction relief in the Thornton Municipal Court,
alleging among other things that his conviction was obtained in violation of his constitutional
right to counsel. On December 18, 2003, the Thornton Municipal Court (Hon. Mary Dulacki presiding)
denied defendant's motion as untimely.
6. Defendant has now filed a timely Notice of Appeal in the Thornton Municipal Court, appealing the
order denying post-conviction relief. Further, he has docketed the appeal in the Adams County District
Court.
7. By this motion, defendant likewise seeks recusal of all Adams County Judges. Because two of their
fellow judges are named victims in the related felony case, a substantial appearance of impropriety
would exist, should the present appeal be assigned to any Adams County Judge. The nature of the related
felony charges -- threats against fellow judges sitting within the same jurisdiction -- creates a
likelihood that all judges will be prejudiced with respect to any of defendant's pending cases, or at the
very least, will be personally interested in the outcome of the cases.
8. Upon filing of this motion all other proceedings in this case shall be suspended until the Court has
made a ruling in regards to this issue in accordance with C.R.S. § 16-6-201.
9. Two supporting affidavits, as required by § 16-6-201, are attached as Exhibits B and C.
LEGAL ARGUMENT
I. The appearance of possible prejudice requires that the Adams County Judges be disqualified.
In a related case, defendant is charged with attempting to influence the judges who presided over his
Thornton Municipal Court case and the direct appeal of that case. Defendant, in the present case, now seeks
to appeal the denial of post-conviction relief by the Thornton Municipal Court. In cases involving public
corruption, the appearance of propriety is of great concern and militates in favor of disqualification of a judge
if there is a small showing of prejudice or interest in a case or the defendant. People v. District Court of
Third Judicial District, 560 P.2d 828, 833 (Colo. 1977) (citing People ex rel. Burke v. District Court, 152
P. 149 (1915)). In People ex rel. Burke v. District Court, 152 P. 149 (Colo. 1915), the court noted that a
judge may not try a case if he or she is in any way interested in the case.
Both Rule 21(b) of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure and C.R.S. § 16-6-201 contemplate that a judge
should be disqualified if he or she is in any way prejudiced with respect to the case, the parties, or counsel.
Further, the case law supports such disqualification. See e.g. People v. District Court of Third Judicial
District, 560 P.2d 828, 833 (Colo. 1977). In Burke, for example, the Colorado Supreme Court stated, "[b]ecause
appearances can be as damaging to public confidence in the courts as actual bias or prejudice, a trial judge
must scrupulously avoid any appearance of bias or prejudice." People v. District Court of Third Judicial
District, 560 P.2d 828, 833 (Colo. 1977). A judge must always conduct himself in a manner that promotes public
confidence in the impartiality of the system.
In the related felony case, the basis of the charges brought against the defendant is a notice that he filed
with Judge Marshall and Judge Rose. In that notice, the defendant alleged that the aforementioned judges were
not upholding the Constitution of the United States and that they were guilty of committing treason. In short,
he was alleging that they were corrupt. Thus, the high standard of appearance of impropriety first announced
in Burke must be employed in reviewing this request.
Judge Marshall serves in Adams County - the same county in which defendant was required to file his present
appeal. Any Adams County judge to whom the present appeal would be assigned works in the same building as
Judge Marshall and presumably would have contact him on a regular basis. Judge Marshall transmitted his findings
in regards to Mr. Stanley's appeal to all other Judges and Magistrates serving in the Adams County Courts.
This action by Judge Marshall put the other judges on notice of defendant's prior appeal and may have prejudiced
defendant in the eyes of the judges who received Judge Marshall's opinion.
WHEREFORE, to preserve the integrity and impartiality of the courts, defendant respectfully requests that the
Adams County Judges be disqualified from presiding over this appeal.
Respectfully submitted this ____ day of December, 2003.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________________
R. Scott Reisch
Stacey L. Ross
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I do hereby certify that on the ____ day of December, 2003, I ? deposited in the U.S. Mail, or ? sent via
facsimile to the following number: ___________ or ? hand delivered the foregoing MOTION FOR RECUSAL to the
following:
Jacob A. Starkovich
Thornton City Attorney
9500 Civic Center Drive
Thornton, CO 80229-4326
________________________________________________
