In re: the PEOPLE of the State of Colorado v. In the Interest of: A.S.M., a Juvenile.

<div data-spec-version="0.0.3dev" data-generated-on="2024-05-23">
<div class="generated-from-iceberg vlex-toc">
<link href="https://doc-stylesheets.vlex.com/ldml-xml.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"></link>
<div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-header header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovasmcaseno22sa71517p3d675september26,2022" data-content-heading-label="Header"><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-cite"><b class="ldml-bold">517 P.3d 675</b></span></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-party">In re: the <span class="ldml-name">PEOPLE of the State of Colorado</span></span>,</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold">v.</b><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-party">In the Interest of: <span class="ldml-name">A.S.M.</span>, a <span class="ldml-role">Juvenile</span></span>.</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold">Supreme Court <span class="ldml-cite">Case No. 22SA71</span> </b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-court">Supreme Court of Colorado</span>.</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-date"><b class="ldml-bold">September 26, 2022</b></span></p></div><div class="ldml-counsel header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Counsel"><p data-paragraph-id="170" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="170" data-sentence-id="170" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity">the People</span> of the <span class="ldml-entity">State of Colorado</span>: <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">John Kellner</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">District Attorney</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Eighteenth Judicial District</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">L. Andrew Cooper</span></span>, <span class="ldml-role">Deputy <span class="ldml-entity">District Attorney</span></span>, Centennial, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="348" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="348" data-sentence-id="348" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for A.S.M.: Appeal to <span class="ldml-entity">Justice LLC</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Amy D. Trenary</span></span>, Broomfield, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="429" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="429" data-sentence-id="429" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-role">Respondent</span></span> <span class="ldml-entity">Arapahoe County District Court</span>: <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Philip J. Weiser</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Joseph A. Peters</span></span>, Senior Assistant <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, Denver, Colorado</span></p></div><h2 class="ldml-opinionheading"><span data-paragraph-id="591" class="ldml-paragraph "><span class="ldml-judgepanel"><span data-paragraph-id="591" data-sentence-id="591" class="ldml-sentence">En Banc</span></span></span></h2><div class="ldml-opinion"><p data-paragraph-id="598" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-4"><span class="ldml-opinionauthor content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Opinion (SAMOUR, BOATRIGHT, MÁRQUEZ, HOOD, GABRIEL, HART, BERKENKOTTER, SAMOUR)"><span data-paragraph-id="598" data-sentence-id="598" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">SAMOUR</span></span> <span class="ldml-opiniontype">delivered <span class="ldml-entity">the Opinion of <span class="ldml-entity">the Court</span></span></span>, in which CHIEF JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">BOATRIGHT</span></span>, JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">MÁRQUEZ</span></span>, JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">HOOD</span></span>, JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">GABRIEL</span></span>, JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">HART</span></span>, and JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">BERKENKOTTER</span></span> joined</span>.</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="777" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-4"><span class="ldml-opinionauthor"><span data-paragraph-id="777" data-sentence-id="777" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">SAMOUR</span></span> <span class="ldml-opiniontype">delivered <span class="ldml-entity">the Opinion of <span class="ldml-entity">the Court</span></span></span></span>.</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="827" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="827" data-sentence-id="827" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_827"><span class="ldml-cite">¶1</span></a></span> The question before <span class="ldml-entity">us</span> in this delinquency case is whether A.S.M., a juvenile, is entitled to have <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> judge review the preliminary hearing finding made by <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> magistrate.<a href="#note-fr1" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr1">1</a></span> <span data-paragraph-id="827" data-sentence-id="1032" class="ldml-sentence">The answer is yes.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="1050" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="1050" data-sentence-id="1050" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1050"><span class="ldml-cite">¶2</span></a></span> Following a preliminary hearing, a magistrate in the <span class="ldml-entity">Eighteenth Judicial District</span> determined that probable cause existed to believe that A.S.M. had committed the delinquent acts alleged.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1050" data-sentence-id="1240" class="ldml-sentence">A.S.M. timely sought review of the magistrate's probable cause determination.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1050" data-sentence-id="1318" class="ldml-sentence">But <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> declined to review the matter on the merits, ruling that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the magistrate's preliminary hearing finding did not constitute a final order.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1050" data-sentence-id="1523" class="ldml-sentence">A.S.M. then invoked our original jurisdiction, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> issued a rule to show cause.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="1605" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="1605" data-sentence-id="1605" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1605"><span class="ldml-cite">¶3</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> now make the rule absolute.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1605" data-sentence-id="1639" class="ldml-sentence">While only <span class="ldml-entity">a district court</span> magistrate's final orders or judgments—namely, those fully resolving an issue or claim—are reviewable under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>, the preliminary hearing <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> in the Children's Code, <span class="ldml-entity">section</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2022</span>)</span></a></span>, specifically permits review of a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding.<a href="#note-fr2" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr2">2</a></span> <span data-paragraph-id="1605" data-sentence-id="1960" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-refname">Section</span> <span class="ldml-cite">19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2022</span>)</span></a></span>, which sets the ground rules for a <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1960"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> review, doesn't alter this conclusion.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1605" data-sentence-id="2093" class="ldml-sentence">Therefore, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> need not get in the middle of <span class="ldml-entity">the parties</span>' tug-of-war over whether the magistrate's preliminary hearing finding in <span class="ldml-entity">this case</span> constituted a final order.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1605" data-sentence-id="2259" class="ldml-sentence">Instead, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> hold that <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2259"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> entitles prosecutors and juveniles alike to ask <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> to review a magistrate's preliminary <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-val="677" data-id="pagenumber_2405" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-rep="P.3d"></span> hearing finding in a delinquency proceeding.</span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-specifier="I" data-id="heading_2450" data-types="background" data-confidences="very_high" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-value="I. Facts and Procedural History" data-ordinal_end="1" data-ordinal_start="1" id="heading_2450" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="I. Facts and Procedural History"><span data-paragraph-id="2450" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="2450" data-sentence-id="2450" class="ldml-sentence">I.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2450" data-sentence-id="2453" class="ldml-sentence">Facts and Procedural History</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="2481" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="2481" data-sentence-id="2481" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2481"><span class="ldml-cite">¶4</span></a></span> Between <span class="ldml-entity">July 1 and July 4, 2020</span>, A.S.M., then sixteen years old, allegedly committed delinquent acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute two class 6 felonies, two class 1 misdemeanors, and one class 2 misdemeanor.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2481" data-sentence-id="2711" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The prosecution</span> filed a five-count delinquency petition against him, and <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> was detained pending adjudication.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2481" data-sentence-id="2822" class="ldml-sentence">Because A.S.M. was accused of two offenses that would qualify as class 6 felonies in the adult arena <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(attempted aggravated motor vehicle theft in the second degree and conspiracy to commit that crime)</span>, and because <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> was in custody, <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> was eligible for a preliminary hearing on those offenses.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2481" data-sentence-id="3116" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2822"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-headnoteanchor"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="3135" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="3135" data-sentence-id="3135" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3135"><span class="ldml-cite">¶5</span></a></span> A.S.M. requested, and a magistrate conducted, a preliminary hearing.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3135" data-sentence-id="3207" class="ldml-sentence">During the hearing, <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> called one witness, the investigating detective.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3135" data-sentence-id="3292" class="ldml-sentence">At the conclusion of the hearing, A.S.M. argued that <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> had failed to establish probable cause to believe that <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> had committed the delinquent acts alleged in the two counts in question.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3135" data-sentence-id="3492" class="ldml-sentence">The magistrate thought this was a <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"close"</span> call but ultimately found that probable cause existed as to both offenses.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3135" data-sentence-id="3609" class="ldml-sentence">A.S.M. then timely petitioned <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> for review of the magistrate's probable cause determination.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="3718" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="3718" data-sentence-id="3718" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3718"><span class="ldml-cite">¶6</span></a></span> In a well-written order, <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review the magistrate's probable cause finding.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3718" data-sentence-id="3869" class="ldml-sentence">To unravel the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"confusion around this issue,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span> first looked to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3869"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> for guidance.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3718" data-sentence-id="3977" class="ldml-sentence">It pointed out that this provision <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"seemingly suggests"</span> that either <span class="ldml-entity">party</span> may ask <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> to review a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding in a delinquency proceeding.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3718" data-sentence-id="4158" class="ldml-sentence">But <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span> felt that <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4158"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> was in conflict with other authority.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="4241" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="4241" data-sentence-id="4241" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4241"><span class="ldml-cite">¶7</span></a></span> To begin, <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span> observed that <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4241"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> states that any review of a preliminary hearing finding must be performed pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4241"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>, which <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span> read as requiring a final order.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4241" data-sentence-id="4458" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The court</span> added that <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Review of <span class="ldml-entity">District Court</span> Magistrate Orders or Judgments"</span>)</span></span> and <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity">People</span> in the Interest of </i><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4458" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">J.D.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2020 CO 48</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">464 P.3d 785</span></a></span>, corroborate the conclusion that <span class="ldml-entity">parties</span> can only seek review of a magistrate's ruling if it constitutes a final order or judgment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4241" data-sentence-id="4741" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_4761,sentence_4458"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"Only a final order or judgment of a magistrate is reviewable under this </span><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_4842,sentence_4458"><span class="ldml-cite">Rule. A</span></a></span></span> <span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">final order or judgment is that which fully resolves an issue or claim."</span></span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4458" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname">J.D.</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4458"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 12</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_4946" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-cite">464 P.3d at 788</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">indicating that, under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">a district court</span> magistrate's decisions <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"that are not themselves final become subject to review by <span class="ldml-entity">a district court</span> judge only after entry of a final order or judgment, which fully resolves the issue or claim being litigated at the proceeding in question"</span></span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4241" data-sentence-id="5243" class="ldml-sentence">Continuing, <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span> reasoned that the magistrate's preliminary hearing finding was not a final order subject to review under <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5243" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">J.D.</i></span></a></span></span></span> because it did not fully resolve an issue or claim.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4241" data-sentence-id="5440" class="ldml-sentence">Lastly, <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span> analogized a provision in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5440"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609</span></a></span> to parts of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5440"><span class="ldml-cite">Crim. P. 5 and 7</span></a></span>, the rules governing preliminary hearings in adult <span class="ldml-entity">cases</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4241" data-sentence-id="5590" class="ldml-sentence">Like <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5590"><span class="ldml-cite">Crim. P. 5<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(4)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span> and 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(4)</span>, section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(d)</span></span></a></span> requires that the accused's case be set for trial upon a finding of probable cause following a preliminary hearing.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4241" data-sentence-id="5771" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The court</span> inferred from this similarity that the next step in the proceeding was to set A.S.M.'s case for trial, thereby eliminating any opportunity for review of the magistrate's preliminary hearing finding.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="5979" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="5979" data-sentence-id="5979" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5979"><span class="ldml-cite">¶8</span></a></span> A.S.M. thereafter filed a petition in our <span class="ldml-entity">court</span> seeking exercise of our original jurisdiction pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.A.R. 21</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5979" data-sentence-id="6099" class="ldml-sentence">For the reasons <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> set forth next, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> decided to exercise our original jurisdiction.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-ordinal_end="2" data-id="heading_6183" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-specifier="II" data-value="II. Reasons Justifying Exercise of Our Original Jurisdiction" data-ordinal_start="2" id="heading_6183" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="II. Reasons Justifying Exercise of Our Original Jurisdiction"><span data-paragraph-id="6183" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="6183" data-sentence-id="6183" class="ldml-sentence">II.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6183" data-sentence-id="6187" class="ldml-sentence">Reasons Justifying Exercise of Our Original Jurisdiction</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="6243" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="6243" data-sentence-id="6244" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6244"><span class="ldml-cite">¶9</span></a></span> Under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.A.R. 21</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> have sole discretion to exercise our original jurisdiction.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6243" data-sentence-id="6327" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6244"><span class="ldml-cite">C.A.R. 21<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6243" data-sentence-id="6348" class="ldml-sentence">However, because a <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.A.R. 21</span></a></span> proceeding is extraordinary in nature and limited in purpose and availability, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> have historically cabined exercise of our original jurisdiction to such circumstances as when an appellate remedy would be inadequate, <span class="ldml-entity">a party</span> may suffer irreparable harm, or a petition raises an issue of first impression that has significant public importance.</span> <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-val="678" data-id="pagenumber_6721" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-rep="P.3d"></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="6721" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="6721" data-sentence-id="6722" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovcortes-gonzalezno21sa3082022co14march21,2022"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Cortes-Gonzalez</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2022 CO 14</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 21</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:506p3d835,842"><span class="ldml-cite">506 P.3d 835, 842</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6721" data-sentence-id="6786" class="ldml-sentence">In his <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.A.R. 21</span></a></span> petition</span>, A.S.M. argued that the circumstances here justified exercise of our original jurisdiction.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6721" data-sentence-id="6904" class="ldml-sentence">As the rule to show cause <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> issued evinces, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> agreed.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="6959" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="6959" data-sentence-id="6959" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6959"><span class="ldml-cite">¶10</span></a></span> First, A.S.M. has no adequate appellate remedy.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6959" data-sentence-id="7011" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The juvenile court</span>'s alleged error implicates his right to review of the magistrate's preliminary hearing finding, and that right will be rendered moot after trial.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6959" data-sentence-id="7176" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">Cf.</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7011" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovrowellcaseno19sa180453p3d1156december9,2019"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Rowell</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 104</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7011"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 11</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_7239" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovrowellcaseno19sa180453p3d1156december9,2019"><span class="ldml-cite">453 P.3d 1156, 1159</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">reaching a similar conclusion with respect to the right to a preliminary hearing</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovtafoyacaseno18sa224434p3d1193february19,2019"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Tafoya</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 13</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 15</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovtafoyacaseno18sa224434p3d1193february19,2019"><span class="ldml-cite">434 P.3d 1193, 1195</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(same)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="7385" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="7385" data-sentence-id="7385" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7385"><span class="ldml-cite">¶11</span></a></span> Second, <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span>'s denial of A.S.M.'s <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span>, if incorrect, deprives him of a statutory right and may require him to improperly remain in custody.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7385" data-sentence-id="7558" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">Cf.</span> </i> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7385" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovrowellcaseno19sa180453p3d1156december9,2019"><span class="ldml-refname">Rowell</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7385"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 12</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_7595" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovrowellcaseno19sa180453p3d1156december9,2019"><span class="ldml-cite">453 P.3d at 1159</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-relatingauthority">noting</span> that denial of the request for a preliminary hearing on the relevant charges, if incorrect, deprived <span class="ldml-entity">the defendant</span> of a statutory right and potentially required him to improperly remain in custody until trial</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7385" data-sentence-id="7813" class="ldml-sentence">To the extent <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> erred, no appellate relief will be able to undo the wrong inflicted on A.S.M.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7385" data-sentence-id="7924" class="ldml-sentence">Thus, absent exercise of our original jurisdiction, A.S.M. may suffer irreparable harm.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="8011" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="8011" data-sentence-id="8011" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8011"><span class="ldml-cite">¶12</span></a></span> Third, the question raised in A.S.M.'s petition is of significant public importance and has not yet been considered by Colorado's <span class="ldml-entity">appellate courts</span>: Is a juvenile entitled to have <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> review a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding in a delinquency case?</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8011" data-sentence-id="8284" class="ldml-sentence">And, as <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> acknowledged, the issue is mired in confusion.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="8357" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="8357" data-sentence-id="8357" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8357"><span class="ldml-cite">¶13</span></a></span> Given <span class="ldml-entity">these circumstances</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> determined that exercising our original jurisdiction was warranted.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8357" data-sentence-id="8459" class="ldml-sentence">Before explaining why <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> now make absolute our rule to show cause, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> take a moment to articulate the standard that shepherds our review.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-specifier="III" data-id="heading_8596" data-types="standardofreview" data-confidences="very_high" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-value="III. Standard of Review" data-ordinal_end="3" data-ordinal_start="3" id="heading_8596" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="III. Standard of Review"><span data-paragraph-id="8596" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="8596" data-sentence-id="8596" class="ldml-sentence">III.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8596" data-sentence-id="8601" class="ldml-sentence">Standard of Review</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="8619" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="8619" data-sentence-id="8620" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8620"><span class="ldml-cite">¶14</span></a></span> Whether A.S.M. is entitled to have <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> review the magistrate's probable cause finding hinges on our <span class="ldml-entity">interpretation of <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8620"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8620"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span></span></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8619" data-sentence-id="8823" class="ldml-sentence">Questions of statutory interpretation are questions of law that are subject to de novo review.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8619" data-sentence-id="8918" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8823" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovrowellcaseno19sa180453p3d1156december9,2019"><span class="ldml-refname">Rowell</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8823"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:inrethepeopleofthestateofcoloradovrowellcaseno19sa180453p3d1156december9,2019"><span class="ldml-cite">453 P.3d at 1159</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8619" data-sentence-id="8950" class="ldml-sentence">So are questions of rule interpretation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8619" data-sentence-id="8991" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886310317" data-vids="886310317" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8950"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Northstar Project Mgmt., Inc. v. DLR Grp., Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2013 CO 12</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8950"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 12</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_9082" data-refglobal="case:295p3d956,959"><span class="ldml-cite">295 P.3d 956, 959</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"<span class="ldml-entity">We</span> interpret rules of procedure consistent with principles of statutory construction and, thus, review procedural rules de novo as well."</span></span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886955327" data-vids="886955327" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_9275"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">People v. Zhuk</i></span> , <span class="ldml-cite">239 P.3d 437, 438-39</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2010</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">applying de novo review to construction of appellate rules</span>)</span></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-specifier="IV" data-id="heading_9335" data-types="analysis" data-confidences="very_high" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-value="IV. Analysis" data-ordinal_end="4" data-ordinal_start="4" id="heading_9335" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="IV. Analysis"><span data-paragraph-id="9335" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="9335" data-sentence-id="9335" class="ldml-sentence">IV.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9335" data-sentence-id="9339" class="ldml-sentence">Analysis</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="9347" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="9347" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9347"><span class="ldml-cite">¶15</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9347"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 19-2.5-609</span></a></span>, titled <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Preliminary hearing-dispositional hearing,"</span> addresses preliminary hearings in delinquency proceedings.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="9482" class="ldml-sentence">Among other things, it delineates when a juvenile or <span class="ldml-entity">a prosecutor</span> may demand and receive a preliminary hearing to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that the delinquent act alleged was committed by the juvenile.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="9712" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9482"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span>, <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="9737" class="ldml-sentence">It also sets forth the timeframe within which a preliminary hearing must be held if the juvenile is being detained as a result of the delinquent act alleged.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="9895" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9737"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="9915" class="ldml-sentence">Further, it states that <span class="ldml-entity">the parties</span> have no right to demand that the preliminary hearing be conducted by <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> instead of a magistrate.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="10062" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9915"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="10083" class="ldml-sentence">But if the hearing is in front of a magistrate, either <span class="ldml-entity">party</span> may make <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span> <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span>"</span> of the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"preliminary hearing finding."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="10216" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10083"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-headnoteanchor"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="10233" class="ldml-sentence">Any such request must <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"be filed pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10233"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>"</span> and reviewed <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"pursuant to said <span class="ldml-entity">section</span>."</span><a href="#note-fr3" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr3">3</a></span> <span data-paragraph-id="9347" data-sentence-id="10341" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10233"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="10344" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="10344" data-sentence-id="10345" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10345"><span class="ldml-cite">¶16</span></a></span> There is no ambiguity in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10345"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10344" data-sentence-id="10397" class="ldml-sentence">It clearly permits <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span> <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span> of a preliminary hearing finding entered by a magistrate."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="10344" data-sentence-id="10499" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10397"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="10344" data-sentence-id="10503" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> are <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-val="679" data-id="pagenumber_10510" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-rep="P.3d"></span> required to give statutory words and phrases their plain and ordinary meaning because our chief goal in interpreting <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> is to ascertain and effectuate <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s intent.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10344" data-sentence-id="10695" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/934099257" data-vids="934099257" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10503"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Garcia v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2022 CO 6</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10503"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 17</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:503p3d135,140"><span class="ldml-cite">503 P.3d 135, 140</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10344" data-sentence-id="10749" class="ldml-sentence">Where, as here, <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> is free from ambiguity, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">we</span> need look no further."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="10344" data-sentence-id="10826" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10749"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">McCoy v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 44</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10749"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 38</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">442 P.3d 379, 389</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10344" data-sentence-id="10880" class="ldml-sentence">Once <span class="ldml-entity">we</span>'ve given an unambiguous <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>'s words and phrases their plain and ordinary meaning, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"our work is done."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="10344" data-sentence-id="10994" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/934099257" data-vids="934099257" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10880"><span class="ldml-refname">Garcia</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10880"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 17</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:503p3d135,140"><span class="ldml-cite">503 P.3d at 140</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="11024" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="11024" data-sentence-id="11024" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11024"><span class="ldml-cite">¶17</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">The juvenile court</span>, however, read <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11024"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> as requiring a final order, and since <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11024"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> states that any review of a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding must be conducted pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11024"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span> concluded that the magistrate's order was reviewable only if it qualified as a final order, which <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span> determined it didn't.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11024" data-sentence-id="11406" class="ldml-sentence">Not surprisingly, <span class="ldml-entity">the parties</span> devote large portions of their briefs to whether the magistrate's preliminary hearing was a final order.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11024" data-sentence-id="11541" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> need not reach that question, though, because <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> conclude that <span class="ldml-entity">requests for review</span> under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11541"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> aren't confined to final orders.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11024" data-sentence-id="11688" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> do so for two reasons.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="11713" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="11713" data-sentence-id="11713" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11713"><span class="ldml-cite">¶18</span></a></span> First, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11713"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> contains no restriction related to final orders.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11713" data-sentence-id="11795" class="ldml-sentence">In fact, the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"final order"</span> does not appear in that provision.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11713" data-sentence-id="11862" class="ldml-sentence">What <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11862"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> references is a magistrate's <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"ruling."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11713" data-sentence-id="11928" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_11945,sentence_11862"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">setting deadlines to file <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span> <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span>"</span> following <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"notice of the magistrate's <i class="ldml-italics">ruling"</i></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11713" data-sentence-id="12061" class="ldml-sentence">Consistent with the word <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"ruling,"</span> elsewhere <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12061"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108</span></a></span> discusses situations in which <span class="ldml-entity">a party</span> is <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"bound by the <i class="ldml-italics">findings and recommendations</i> of the magistrate, subject to a <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span> as set forth in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12061"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a> of <span class="ldml-entity">this section</span></span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11713" data-sentence-id="12309" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12061"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a.5)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11713" data-sentence-id="12346" class="ldml-sentence">There is no dispute here that the magistrate's determination of probable cause qualified as a <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"finding<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ ]</span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11713" data-sentence-id="12454" class="ldml-sentence">Indeed, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12454"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> specifically refers to a magistrate's <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"preliminary hearing finding."</span><a href="#note-fr4" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr4">4</a></span> </p><p data-paragraph-id="12553" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="12553" data-sentence-id="12553" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12553"><span class="ldml-cite">¶19</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> read <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12553"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> not as modifying <span class="ldml-entity">a party</span>'s right to seek review of a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12553"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>, but rather as establishing the ground rules for such review.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12553" data-sentence-id="12771" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12771"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> : sets the deadline to file a <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span>; requires the petitioning <span class="ldml-entity">party</span> to articulate the reasons related to the <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span>; restricts the review to the record of the hearing held and to the reasons for review contained in <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.C.P. 59</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span></span> requires review by <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> before an appeal may be filed with <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> or our <span class="ldml-entity">court</span>; and gives <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> discretion to remand <span class="ldml-entity">the case</span> to a different magistrate after completing its review.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12553" data-sentence-id="13265" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12771"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12553" data-sentence-id="13282" class="ldml-sentence">Nowhere in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13282"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> is there any indication that only final orders are subject to review.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="13384" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="13384" data-sentence-id="13385" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13385"><span class="ldml-cite">¶20</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> have no authority to erect a final-order boundary around <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13385"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13384" data-sentence-id="13472" class="ldml-sentence">In construing <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">courts</span> may not add words to it.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13384" data-sentence-id="13529" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13472" data-refglobal="case:mcbridevpeople,2022co30"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">McBride v. People</i></span> , <span class="ldml-cite">2022 CO 30</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13472"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 23</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/928738243" data-vids="928738243" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">511 P.3d 613, 617</span></a></span>.<a href="#note-fr5" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr5">5</a></span> </p><p data-paragraph-id="13586" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="13586" data-sentence-id="13586" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13586"><span class="ldml-cite">¶21</span></a></span> Second, were <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> to endorse <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span>'s analysis</span>, it would drain <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13586"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> of all meaning.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13586" data-sentence-id="13701" class="ldml-sentence">If <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13701"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> covers only final orders and a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding is not a final order, when would <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13701"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> apply?</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13586" data-sentence-id="13860" class="ldml-sentence">In other words, if a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding is not a final order and <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13860"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> only permits review of a final order, when would <span class="ldml-entity">a party</span> be <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-val="680" data-id="pagenumber_14029" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-rep="P.3d"></span> entitled to review of a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding?</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13586" data-sentence-id="14096" class="ldml-sentence">The answer, of course, is never.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="14128" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="14128" data-sentence-id="14129" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14129"><span class="ldml-cite">¶22</span></a></span> But that can't be right.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14128" data-sentence-id="14158" class="ldml-sentence">It is now beyond question that <span class="ldml-entity">courts</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"strive to avoid interpretations that would render statutory language meaningless."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="14128" data-sentence-id="14280" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886793496" data-vids="886793496" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14158"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Chavez v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2015 CO 62</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14158"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 21</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886793496" data-vids="886793496" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">359 P.3d 1040, 1044</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14128" data-sentence-id="14337" class="ldml-sentence">And <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> must do our utmost <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to give consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect"</span> to the different parts of <span class="ldml-entity">a statutory scheme</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14128" data-sentence-id="14463" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888909510" data-vids="888909510" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14337"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Dep't of Revenue v. Agilent Techs., Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 41</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14337"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 16</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888909510" data-vids="888909510" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">441 P.3d 1012, 1016</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/885985135" data-vids="885985135" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">UMB Bank, N.A. v. Landmark Towers Ass'n</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2017 CO 107</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 22</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/885985135" data-vids="885985135" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">408 P.3d 836, 840</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="14632" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="14632" data-sentence-id="14633" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14633"><span class="ldml-cite">¶23</span></a></span> Here, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span>'s approach</span> robbed <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14633"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> of all meaning and failed to give consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect to the different parts of <span class="ldml-entity">the statutory scheme</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14632" data-sentence-id="14828" class="ldml-sentence">In the process, it contravened the General Assembly's intent.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14632" data-sentence-id="14890" class="ldml-sentence">There is no doubt that the General Assembly meant to allow review of a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding in a delinquency proceeding.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14632" data-sentence-id="15031" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14890"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14632" data-sentence-id="15052" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> cannot contradict this edict.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14632" data-sentence-id="15085" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"It is a cardinal rule of statutory construction that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislative intent</span> should be ascertained and given effect whenever possible."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="14632" data-sentence-id="15221" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887791367" data-vids="887791367" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15085"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Stevens</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">183 Colo. 399</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">517 P.2d 1336, 1340</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1973</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="15282" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="15282" data-sentence-id="15283" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15283"><span class="ldml-cite">¶24</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> therefore hold that prosecutors and juveniles alike are statutorily entitled to ask <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> to review a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding in a delinquency proceeding.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="15472" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="15472" data-sentence-id="15472" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15472"><span class="ldml-cite">¶25</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> are not persuaded otherwise by <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>, which provides that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[o]</span>nly a final order or judgment of a magistrate is reviewable under this Rule"</span> and that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span> final order or judgment is that which fully resolves an issue or claim."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="15472" data-sentence-id="15714" class="ldml-sentence">Just a couple of terms ago, in discussing this rule, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> recognized that <span class="ldml-entity">a district court</span> magistrate's decisions <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"that are not themselves final become subject to review by <span class="ldml-entity">a district court</span> judge only after entry of a final order or judgment, which fully resolves the issue or claim being litigated at the proceeding in question."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="15472" data-sentence-id="16043" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15714" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname">J.D.</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15714"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 12</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-cite">464 P.3d at 788</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="15472" data-sentence-id="16072" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The juvenile court</span> here relied on <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16072" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">J.D.</i></span></a></span></span></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="15472" data-sentence-id="16130" class="ldml-sentence">But that reliance was misplaced, as neither buttresses its construction of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16130"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="16227" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="16227" data-sentence-id="16227" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16227"><span class="ldml-cite">¶26</span></a></span> C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span> is part of the general rule that, as its title suggests, controls <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Review of <span class="ldml-entity">District Court</span> Magistrate Orders or Judgments."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="16227" data-sentence-id="16371" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span> resides within the Colorado Magistrate Rules and, in contrast to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16371"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>, is not specific to delinquency <span class="ldml-entity">cases</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16227" data-sentence-id="16506" class="ldml-sentence">Importantly, by its own terms, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> applies only to <span class="ldml-entity">requests for review</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"under this <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[r]</span>ule."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="16227" data-sentence-id="16609" class="ldml-sentence">A.S.M.'s <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span>, however, was not submitted under <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span></span> it was submitted under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16609"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="16727" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="16727" data-sentence-id="16727" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16727"><span class="ldml-cite">¶27</span></a></span> In our view, there is no conflict between <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16727"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16727" data-sentence-id="16815" class="ldml-sentence">A <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span> related to a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding in a delinquency proceeding is governed by <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16815"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>, while a more general <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span> challenging <span class="ldml-entity">a district court</span> magistrate's order and brought pursuant to <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">not pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> such as <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_17078"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> </span>)</span></span>, is governed by <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span>.<a href="#note-fr6" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr6">6</a> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span> recognizes as much: <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Unless otherwise provided by <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>, <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span> ]</span> is the exclusive method to obtain review of <span class="ldml-entity">a district court</span> magistrate's order or judgment"</span> in a proceeding <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(such as this one)</span> that does not require the consent of <span class="ldml-entity">the parties</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16727" data-sentence-id="17427" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16815"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">see also</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16815"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a.5)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-relatingauthority">noting</span> that a preliminary hearing may be conducted by a magistrate, instead of a judge, without consent of <span class="ldml-entity">the parties</span> because <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[t]</span>he right to require a hearing before a judge does not apply to ... preliminary hearings held pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16815"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609</span></a></span>"</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16727" data-sentence-id="17731" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17731"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> fits snugly into the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[u]</span>nless otherwise provided by <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>"</span> exception in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16727" data-sentence-id="17844" class="ldml-sentence">And while review under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span> is limited to final orders or judgments, review under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17844"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> is not.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="17959" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="17959" data-sentence-id="17959" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17959"><span class="ldml-cite">¶28</span></a></span> Nothing in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17959" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">J.D.</i></span></a></span> is to the contrary.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17959" data-sentence-id="17999" class="ldml-sentence">There, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> simply held that a magistrate is not prohibited <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(either by <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> or <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity">court</span> rule</span>)</span> from reconsidering prior rulings, decrees, <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-val="681" data-id="pagenumber_18134" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-rep="P.3d"></span> or decisions in a delinquency case, so long as the magistrate has been properly appointed to hear <span class="ldml-entity">the case</span> and the proceeding has not yet culminated in a final order or judgment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17959" data-sentence-id="18314" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17999" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname">J.D.</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17999"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 2</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-cite">464 P.3d at 786</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17959" data-sentence-id="18342" class="ldml-sentence">Because the guilty plea entered in front of the magistrate didn't amount to a <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"final order or judgment"</span> under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> concluded that <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> had erred in ruling that the magistrate lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the juvenile's <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18342"><span class="ldml-cite">Crim. P. 32<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(d)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">motion to withdraw his guilty plea</span> prior to sentencing.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17959" data-sentence-id="18671" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18342"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="18674" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="18674" data-sentence-id="18674" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18674"><span class="ldml-cite">¶29</span></a></span> As part of our <span class="ldml-entity">analysis in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18674" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">J.D.</i></span></a></span></span> <i class="ldml-italics">,</i> <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> examined C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18674" data-sentence-id="18740" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18740"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18740"><span class="ldml-cite">¶¶ 7</span></a></span>, 12, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18740" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-cite">464 P.3d at 787, 788</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18674" data-sentence-id="18779" class="ldml-sentence">But <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> did not reference, much less interpret, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18779"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> —there was no reason to, as the issue <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> confronted revolved around a guilty plea, not a preliminary hearing.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18674" data-sentence-id="18958" class="ldml-sentence">Differently put, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18958" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">J.D.</i></span></a></span> did not implicate <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18958"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18674" data-sentence-id="19021" class="ldml-sentence">And though <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> discussed the contents of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19021"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108</span></a></span>, including those governing <span class="ldml-entity">petitions for review</span> in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19021"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19021"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19021"><span class="ldml-cite">¶¶ 6</span></a></span>, 11, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19021" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-cite">464 P.3d at 787, 788</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> didn't consider—because <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> weren't asked to and didn't have to—the interplay between that <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>'s references to a magistrate's <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"ruling"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"findings and recommendations,"</span> on the one hand, and <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>'s reference to <span class="ldml-entity">a district court</span> magistrate's <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"final order or judgment,"</span> on the other.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18674" data-sentence-id="19485" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19485" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">J.D.</i></span></a></span> is, in a word, inapposite.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="19516" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="19516" data-sentence-id="19516" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19516"><span class="ldml-cite">¶30</span></a></span> Besides <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19516" data-refglobal="case:intheinterestofjdcaseno18sc41464p3d785june8,2020"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">J.D.</i></span></a></span></span></span> <i class="ldml-italics">,</i> <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> also relied on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19516"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(d)</span></span></a></span>, which instructs that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[i]</span>f <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span> determines that probable cause exists, it shall enter a finding to that effect and schedule an adjudicatory trial."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="19516" data-sentence-id="19767" class="ldml-sentence">But this provision in no way precludes a <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span> under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19767"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> of the same <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19516" data-sentence-id="19869" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19869"><span class="ldml-cite">Subsections <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(d)</span> and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> can coexist.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19516" data-sentence-id="19909" class="ldml-sentence">Assuming either that no <span class="ldml-entity">party</span> seeks review of a magistrate's determination that there is probable cause or that <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> affirms such a determination on review pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19909"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span>, a finding to that effect must be entered and a trial must be scheduled.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19516" data-sentence-id="20177" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The juvenile court</span>'s reading of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20177"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108</span></a></span>, however, pitted <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20177"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(d)</span></span></a></span> against <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20177"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> and then allowed the former to swallow the latter.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19516" data-sentence-id="20335" class="ldml-sentence">This was error because <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[w]</span>e presume that the General Assembly intended the entire <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> to be effective."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="19516" data-sentence-id="20444" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893459716" data-vids="893459716" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20335"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Luther</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">58 P.3d 1013, 1015</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2002</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="20494" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="20494" data-sentence-id="20494" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20494"><span class="ldml-cite">¶31</span></a></span> And because it was within <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s prerogative to allow <span class="ldml-entity">the parties</span> to seek review of a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding in a delinquency case but not in an adult case, any similarities between <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20494"><span class="ldml-cite">Crim. P. 5<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(4)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span> and 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(4)</span></span></a></span>, on the one hand, and <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20494"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(d)</span></span></a></span>, on the other, are inconsequential.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20494" data-sentence-id="20826" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20826"><span class="ldml-cite">Crim. P. 5 and 7</span></a></span> both lack something <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20826"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609</span></a></span> has: a provision that explicitly permits <span class="ldml-entity">parties</span> to seek review of a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20494" data-sentence-id="20993" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20826"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="21013" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="21013" data-sentence-id="21013" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21013"><span class="ldml-cite">¶32</span></a></span> In sum, <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> mistakenly rejected A.S.M.'s <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span> on jurisdictional grounds.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21013" data-sentence-id="21119" class="ldml-sentence">It should have addressed the merits of the request.<a href="#note-fr7" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr7">7</a></span> </p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-specifier="V" data-id="heading_21171" data-types="conclusion" data-confidences="very_high" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-value="V. Conclusion" data-ordinal_end="5" data-ordinal_start="5" id="heading_21171" data-parsed="true" data-content-heading-label="V. Conclusion"><span data-paragraph-id="21171" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="21171" data-sentence-id="21171" class="ldml-sentence">V.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21171" data-sentence-id="21174" class="ldml-sentence">Conclusion</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="21184" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="21184" data-sentence-id="21184" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21184"><span class="ldml-cite">¶33</span></a></span> For the foregoing reasons, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> make absolute our rule to show cause.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21184" data-sentence-id="21256" class="ldml-sentence">On remand, <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> should review the magistrate's probable cause determination.</span></p></div></div><div class="ldml-notes content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Footnotes"><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="21346" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr1" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr1">1</a> <span data-paragraph-id="21346" data-sentence-id="21347" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> will refer to <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> judge as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">juvenile court</span>"</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">court</span>"</span> and to <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span> magistrate as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"magistrate."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="21346" data-sentence-id="21474" class="ldml-sentence">And <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> will use these abbreviations to generally refer to <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> judge and <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> magistrate, respectively.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="21601" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr2" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr2">2</a> <span data-paragraph-id="21601" data-sentence-id="21602" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span> applies to any <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">district court</span> magistrate."</span></span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="21654" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr3" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr3">3</a> <span data-paragraph-id="21654" data-sentence-id="21655" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21655"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 19-1-108</span></a></span> is <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> in the Children's Code that deals with the duties and qualifications of magistrates who hear matters under <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span>'s jurisdiction.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21654" data-sentence-id="21829" class="ldml-sentence">As well, it contains a provision regarding <span class="ldml-entity">petitions for review</span> of a magistrate's ruling.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21654" data-sentence-id="21919" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21829"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21654" data-sentence-id="21936" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">Petitions for review</span> must be filed in <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21654" data-sentence-id="21994" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21936"><span class="ldml-cite">id.</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal">see also</span></i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_22027,sentence_21936"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">referring to the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">juvenile court</span>"</span></span>)</span></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="22062" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr4" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr4">4</a> <span data-paragraph-id="22062" data-sentence-id="22063" class="ldml-sentence">This opinion should not be understood as suggesting that every ruling, finding, and recommendation by a magistrate is reviewable under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22063"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22062" data-sentence-id="22221" class="ldml-sentence">For our purposes, it suffices to say that <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22221"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> expressly makes a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding subject to review pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22221"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22062" data-sentence-id="22397" class="ldml-sentence">Just what other findings <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(and what rulings and recommendations)</span> by a magistrate are reviewable under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22397"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> is not a question before <span class="ldml-entity">us</span>, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> accordingly pass no judgment on it.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="22591" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr5" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr5">5</a> <span data-paragraph-id="22591" data-sentence-id="22592" class="ldml-sentence">For the same reason, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> decline <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span>'s invitation to declare that <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22592"><span class="ldml-cite">sections 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22592"><span class="ldml-cite">19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span></span></span> circumscribe <span class="ldml-entity">requests for review</span> of a magistrate's preliminary hearing finding to those filed by <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22591" data-sentence-id="22824" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22824"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> refers to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span> <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span>"</span> without ever drawing any distinction between one submitted by <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> and one submitted by a juvenile.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22591" data-sentence-id="22992" class="ldml-sentence">Likewise, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22992"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> talks about <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span> <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span>"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span> <span class="ldml-entity">petition for review</span>,"</span> but it nowhere states that only <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> may bring such a request or petition.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="23177" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr6" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr6">6</a> <span data-paragraph-id="23177" data-sentence-id="23178" class="ldml-sentence">Similarly, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> perceive no conflict between <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23178"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23177" data-sentence-id="23263" class="ldml-sentence">If a <span class="ldml-entity">request for review</span> unrelated to a preliminary hearing finding in a delinquency proceeding is brought pursuant to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23263"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-1-108<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5.5)</span></span></a></span>, that provision, not <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.M. 7</span></a></span>, controls.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="23443" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr7" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr7">7</a> <span data-paragraph-id="23443" data-sentence-id="23444" class="ldml-sentence">Invoking concerns of due process and equal protection, <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> argues in passing that allowing juveniles whose preliminary hearing is conducted by a magistrate to challenge the result in <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span>—<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"with detailed briefing, extensive legal research, and close scrutiny of a transcript"</span>—gives them more favorable treatment than those juveniles whose preliminary hearing is conducted by <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23443" data-sentence-id="23860" class="ldml-sentence">Even overlooking <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span>'s failure to direct <span class="ldml-entity">us</span> to any authority granting it standing to mount this constitutional challenge on behalf of juveniles, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> are not persuaded that today's decision bestows preferential treatment on some juveniles or otherwise gives rise to constitutional concerns.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23443" data-sentence-id="24161" class="ldml-sentence">Those juveniles who have their preliminary hearing in front of <span class="ldml-entity">a juvenile court</span> and are not entitled to seek review under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24161"><span class="ldml-cite">section 19-2.5-609<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span></a></span> may file a <span class="ldml-entity">motion to reconsider</span>—<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"with detailed briefing, extensive legal research, and close scrutiny of a transcript"</span>—if <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> disagree with <span class="ldml-entity">the juvenile court</span>'s preliminary hearing finding.</span></p></div></div></div></div>
</div>
</div>