D.D., Jr. v. People — Colorado Supreme Court denies certiorari petition

Case
D.D., Jr. v. The People of the State of Colorado, In the Interest of N.H.D. and N.D., and Concerning H.H.
Court
Colorado Supreme Court
Judge
Not specified
Date Decided
November 2, 2026
Docket No.
26SC623
Topics
Certiorari; Disposition notice
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

The public order identifies D.D., Jr. as the petitioner and The People of the State of Colorado as the respondent. The caption also states “In the Interest of N.H.D. and N.D., and Concerning H.H.” The matter is docketed in the Supreme Court of Colorado as No. 26SC623, and the order identifies the related Court of Appeals case as No. 25CA2355.

The order is dated November 2, 2026, and lists the Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc. The supplied public text contains the caption, these case identifiers, and one operative line. It does not include a statement of the underlying facts, the issues presented in the petition, the Court of Appeals’ disposition, or any reasoning by the Supreme Court.

The Court’s Holding

The order states in full: “Petition for Writ of Certiorari DENIED.” That is the only disposition stated in the supplied text. The order does not provide a merits holding, an explanation for the denial, or a discussion of any legal issue.

No separate ruling concerning another claim, party, or issue appears in the public order. Because the text supplies no reasoning, this notice does not attribute a rationale to the Court or characterize the underlying proceedings beyond the wording of the caption.

Key Takeaways

  • The Supreme Court of Colorado denied the petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 26SC623.
  • The order is dated November 2, 2026, and identifies Court of Appeals Case No. 25CA2355.
  • The supplied public order states only the outcome and provides no reasoning or merits analysis.

Why It Matters

This Disposition notice records the action expressly stated in the public order: denial of the petition for a writ of certiorari. The document’s verified content is limited to the caption, case numbers, court, date, and that denial.

Public reasoning is unavailable in the supplied text. Accordingly, no factual findings, legal conclusions, or explanation for the Court’s action can be reported from this order.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top