Colorado § 14-10-126 - Interviews.

§ 14-10-126. Interviews.

(1) Upon a motion, the court may interview the child in chambers to ascertain the child's wishes as to the allocation of parental responsibilities. The court may permit counsel or a licensed legal paraprofessional to be present at the interview. The court shall cause a record of the interview to be made, and the interview must be made part of the record in the case. The court shall make findings in its order that explain the reason why the court granted or denied a request to interview the child in chambers.

(2) The court shall give paramount consideration to cases involving an allegation made by a child regarding domestic violence, child abuse or neglect, or child sexual abuse in determining whether to grant a request to interview a child in chambers.

(3) The court may seek the advice of professional personnel whether or not they are employed on a regular basis by the court. The advice given must be in writing and must be made available by the court to counsel of record or licensed legal paraprofessional of record, parties, and other expert witnesses upon request, but the advice must otherwise be confidential, be sealed, and not be open to inspection, except by consent of the court. Counsel or a licensed legal paraprofessional may call for cross-examination of any professional personnel consulted by the court.

Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 530, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 46-1-26. L. 98: (1) amended, p. 1384, § 12, effective February 1, 1999. L. 2024: Entire section amended, (HB 24-1291), ch. 131, p. 470, § 18, effective August 7; entire section amended, (HB 24-1350), ch. 344, p. 2338, § 4, effective August 7.

Editor's note: Amendments to this section by HB 24-1350 were harmonized in part with and superseded in part by HB 24-1291.

Cross references: For the legislative declaration in HB 24-1350, see section 1 of chapter 344, Session Laws of Colorado 2024.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For article, "The Role of Children's Counsel in Contested Child Custody, Visitation and Support Cases", see 15 Colo. Law. 224 (1986). For article, "The Child's Wishes in APR Proceedings: An Evidentiary Conundrum", see 36 Colo. Law. 33 (Jan. 2007).

Section does not mandate interviews. In re Rinow, 624 P.2d 365 (Colo. App. 1981); In re Turek, 817 P.2d 615 (Colo. App. 1991).

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to interview child in chambers. Court had the benefit of prior interview of child, reports filed with the court, and testimony during the hearing. In re Custody of C.J.S., 37 P.3d 479 (Colo. App. 2001).

Parent may not cross-examine child at interview. The father is not entitled, as a matter of law, to cross-examine the children at the time of the interview. In re Agner, 659 P.2d 53 (Colo. App. 1982).

Making record is for benefit of parties. Though the language of this section is mandatory in form, the obvious purpose of making a record is for the benefit of the parties. In re Armbeck, 33 Colo. App. 260, 518 P.2d 300 (1974).

Requirement for record of interview concerning child's preference not violated. Where the court conducted a 15-minute interview with the two minor children but did not inquire concerning their preference the requirement of this section for a record of an interview concerning the children's preference was not violated. In re Short, 675 P.2d 323 (Colo. App. 1983), rev'd on other grounds, 698 P.2d 1310 (Colo. 1985).

Requirement of making record may be waived. The requirement of making a record, i.e., a verbatim transcript, of the interview between the court and child may be waived either expressly or by implication. In re Armbeck, 33 Colo. App. 260, 518 P.2d 300 (1974).

Waiver of the requirement of making a record by implication held sufficient. In re Armbeck, 33 Colo. App. 260, 518 P.2d 300 (1974).

For the standard of the common law with respect to interviews, see Rayer v. Rayer, 32 Colo. App. 400, 512 P.2d 637 (1973).

Applied in In re Schulke, 40 Colo. App. 473, 579 P.2d 90 (1978).