Peo in Interest of EY

── Peo in Interest of EY ── Court: Colorado Court of Appeals Date: May 07, 2026 Category: General 25CA1461 Peo in Interest of EY 05-07-2026 COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 25CA1461 Garfield County District Court No. 24JV30009 Routt County District Court No. 25JV1 Honorable Billy-George Hertzke, Judge The People of the State of Colorado, Appellee, In the Interest of E.Y., a Child, and Concerning C.H., Appellant. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED Division A Opinion by CHIEF JUDGE ROMÁN Bernard*, and Ashby*, JJ., concur NOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(e) Announced May 7, 2026 Lynaia South, County Attorney, Matthew Fredrickson, Senior Assistant County Attorney, Molly Hamsher, Assistant County Attorney, Steamboat Springs, Colorado for Appellee Cassandra Coleman, Guardian Ad Litem Joel M. Pratt, Office of Respondent Parents’ Counsel, Colorado Springs, Colorado for Appellant *Sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice under provisions of Colo. Const. art. VI, § 5(3), and § 24-51-1105, C.R.S. 2025. ¶1 In this dependency and neglect proceeding, C.H. (mother) appeals the juvenile court’s judgment allocating parental responsibilities for E.Y. (the child) to W.Y. (father). We affirm. I. Background ¶2 In May 2024, father brought the child to the Garfield County Department of Human Services acting manic and requesting assistance. While there, father called for an ambulance. When law enforcement arrived with emergency services, they arrested father for violating a protection order restraining him from having contact with the child. The Garfield County Department then placed the child with mother. But four days later, mother informed the Garfield County Department that she was overwhelmed, and she thought it was in the child’s best interests to be placed in foster care. Following a shelter care hearing four days later, the Garfield County Department returned the child to father’s custody, under its protective supervision, and filed a petition in dependency or neglect. ¶3 In October 2024, after law enforcement responded to a welfare check and found father “mentally decompensating” under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, the Garfield County Department sought, and the juvenile court granted, temporary custody of the 1  child for placement in foster care. About six weeks later, the Garfield County Department returned the child to father’s care under its protective supervision. ¶4 Following mother’s admission that the child lacked proper parental care through her acts or omissions, the juvenile court adjudicated the child dependent or neglected. The juvenile court then adopted a treatment plan for mother requiring her to (1) obtain and maintain a safe and stable residence for the child; (2) cooperate with the Garfield County Department; (3) complete a mental health assessment and follow all recommendations; (4) participate in life skills; and (5) maintain a positive relationship with the child by attending all scheduled family time, completing an in-person parenting assessment, and attending an approved parenting class. ¶5 Six months later, the juvenile court changed venue to Routt County, father’s county of residence. Shortly thereafter, the child’s guardian ad litem (GAL) moved for an allocation of parental responsibilities (APR) to father, which the Routt County Department of Human Services joined. Following a hearing, the juvenile court allocated sole decision-making responsibility and primary residential care to father and accorded mother two hours of 2  parenting time, supervised by a licensed mental health professional, per month. II. APR Determination ¶6 Mother contends that the court erred by applying the wrong legal standard when allo