(1) Those courts having jurisdiction over juvenile matters in a judicial district shall have original jurisdiction over all matters arising out of the provisions of this article.
(1.5) (a) All proceedings brought under this article shall be commenced in the judicial district in which the child resides or is present.
(b) When proceedings commence under this article in a judicial district other than that of the child's residence or when the child changes his or her judicial district of residence after a proceeding under this article commences, the court in which proceedings commenced may, on its own motion or on the motion of any interested party, transfer the case to the court in the judicial district where the child resides.
(c) When a court transfers venue pursuant to paragraph (b) of this subsection (1.5), the court shall transmit all documents and reports, or certified copies thereof, to the receiving court, which court shall proceed with the case as if the petition had been originally filed in that court.
(2) If a child or his parent desires court review of an order of the board of education issued pursuant to this article, he shall notify the board in writing within five days after receiving official notification of the board's action. The board of education shall thereupon issue, or cause to be issued, to the child or his parent a statement of the reasons for the board's action. Within ten days thereafter the child or his parents may file with the court a petition requesting that the order of the board of education be set aside, to which shall be appended the statement of the board of education. No docket or other fees shall be collected by the court in connection with this proceeding.
(3) After the petition is filed, the court shall notify the board and shall hold a hearing on the matter. The court shall conduct judicial review of a hearing decision pursuant to rule 106 (a)(4) of the Colorado rules of civil procedure and rule 3.8 of the Colorado rules of juvenile procedure.
(4) It is the duty of the attorney for the school district, an employee authorized by the local board of education pursuant to section 13-1-127 (7), C.R.S., to represent the school district in truancy proceedings, the attendance officer designated by the local board of education, or the local board of education to initiate, when appropriate, proceedings for the enforcement of the compulsory attendance provisions of this article upon request by the attendance officer of the district or of the state.
(5) (a) It is the intent of the general assembly that, in enforcing the compulsory school attendance requirements of this article, a school district shall employ best practices and research-based strategies to minimize the need for court action and the risk that a court will issue detention orders against a child or parent.
(b) A school district shall initiate court proceedings to compel a child and the child's parent to comply with the attendance requirements specified in this article but only as a last-resort approach to address the child's truancy and only if a child continues to be habitually truant after school or school district personnel have created and implemented a plan pursuant to section 22-33-107 (3) to improve the child's school attendance.
(c) Before initiating court proceedings to compel compliance with the attendance requirements specified in this article, the school district shall give the child and the child's parent written notice that the school district will initiate proceedings if the child does not comply with the attendance requirements of this article. The school district may combine the notice and summons. If combined, the petition must state the date on which the school district will initiate proceedings, which date must not be less than five days after the date of the notice and summons. The notice must state the provisions of this article with which compliance is required and must state that the school district will not initiate proceedings if the child complies with the identified provisions before the proceedings are filed.
(d) If a school district initiates court proceedings pursuant to this subsection (5), the school district, at a minimum, must submit to the court evidence of:
(I) The child's attendance record prior to and after the point at which the child was identified as habitually truant;
(II) Whether the child was identified as chronically absent and, if so, the strategies the school district used to improve the child's attendance;
(III) The interventions and strategies used to improve the child's attendance before school or school district personnel created the child's plan described in section 22-33-107 (3); and
(IV) The child's plan and the efforts of the child, the child's parent, and school or school district personnel to implement the plan.
(6) The court before which a proceeding to compel attendance is brought may issue, in its discretion, an order against the child or the child's parent or both compelling the child to attend school as provided by this article or compelling the parent to take reasonable steps to assure the child's attendance. The order must require the child and parent to cooperate with the school district in complying with the plan created for the child pursuant to section 22-33-107 (3).
(7) (a) If the child does not comply with the valid court order issued against the child or against both the parent and the child, the court may order that an assessment for neglect as described in section 19-3-102 (1), C.R.S., be conducted as provided in section 19-3-501, C.R.S. In addition, the court may order the child to show cause why he or she should not be held in contempt of court.
(b) The court may impose sanctions after a finding of contempt that may include, but need not be limited to, community service to be performed by the child, supervised activities, participation in services for at-risk students, as described by section 22-33-204, and other activities having goals that shall ensure that the child has an opportunity to obtain a quality education.
(c) If the court finds that the child has refused to comply with the plan created for the child pursuant to section 22-33-107 (3), the court may impose on the child as a sanction for contempt of court a sentence of detention for no more than five days in a juvenile detention facility operated by or under contract with the department of human services pursuant to section 19-2-402, C.R.S., and any rules promulgated by the Colorado supreme court.
(8) If the parent refuses or neglects to obey the order issued against the parent or against both the parent and the child, the court may order the parent to show cause why he or she should not be held in contempt of court, and, if the parent fails to show cause, the court may impose a fine of up to but not more than twenty-five dollars per day or confine the parent in the county jail until the order is complied with.
Source: L. 63: p. 865, 9. C.R.S. 1963: 123-20-9. L. 67: p. 1054, 15. L. 81: (5) and (7) amended, p. 1066, 1, effective May 27. L. 84: (4) and (8) amended, p. 601, 2, effective July 1. L. 87: (5) and (7) amended, p. 829, 2, effective July 1. L. 90: (7) amended, p. 1019, 7, effective April 20; (7) amended, p. 1847, 40, effective May 31. L. 94: (1.5) added, p. 677, 1, effective April 19; (3) amended, p. 447, 3, effective July 1; (7) amended, p. 2691, 221, effective July 1. L. 96: (7) amended, p. 1693, 31, effective January 1, 1997. L. 97: (6) to (8) amended, p. 41, 2, effective July 1. L. 2001: (1) and (1.5) amended, p. 871, 3, effective June 1. L. 2002: (7) amended, p. 248, 1, effective April 12. L. 2006: (3) amended, p. 257, 4, effective March 31. L. 2007: (4) amended, p. 165, 4, effective March 22. L. 2011: (5) and (7)(a) amended, (HB 11-1053), ch. 58, p. 154, 2, effective March 25. L. 2013: (5), (6), and (7) amended, (HB 13-1021), ch. 335, p. 1948, 3, effective August 7.
Cross references: For the legislative declaration contained in the 1994 act amending subsection (7), see section 1 of chapter 345, Session Laws of Colorado 1994. For the legislative declaration contained in the 2011 act amending subsections (5) and (7)(a), see section 1 of chapter 58, Session Laws of Colorado 2011.
Held unconstitutional. Statute precluding the court from incarcerating a child in a secure facility for contempt in a compulsory school attendance case violates the separation of powers doctrine of the Colorado constitution by impermissibly abrogating the judiciary's power to incarcerate juveniles for contempt of court orders. In Interest of J.E.S., 817 P.2d 508 (Colo. 1991).
The power to review due process claims is inherent in the district court's authority to review the board's determinations for an abuse of discretion. Nichols ex rel. Nichols v. DeStefano, 70 P.3d 505 (Colo. App. 2002), aff'd by operation of law, 84 P.3d 496 (Colo. 2004).
Upon a review of the totality of the circumstances at the hearing, plaintiff was unable to present effectively all relevant evidence and challenge the evidence offered against said plaintiff. Nichols ex rel. Nichols v. DeStefano, 70 P.3d 505 (Colo. App. 2002), aff'd by operation of law, 84 P.3d 496 (Colo. 2004).