OFFICIAL COMMENT

This section of the Act authorizes issuance of a warrant in an emergency situation, such as an allegation that the respondent is preparing to abduct the child to a foreign country and is on the way to the airport. The harm is the credible risk of imminent removal. If the court finds such a risk, the court should temporarily waive the notice requirements and issue a warrant to take physical custody of the child. Immediately after the warrant is executed, the respondent is to receive notice of the proceedings. This section mirrors Section 311 of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act [section 14-13-311, C.R.S.] on warrants to pick up a child which are available when there is an existing child-custody determination. In many states, the term used in civil cases is “writ of attachment.”

The court should hear the testimony of the petitioner or another witness before issuing the warrant. The testimony may be heard in person, by telephone, or by any other means acceptable under local law, which may include video conferencing or use of other technology.

Domestic violence includes “family” violence. Because some batterers may try to use the warrant procedure to prevent victims and the children from escaping domestic violence or child abuse, the court should check relevant state and national databases to see if either the petitioner or respondent’s name is listed or if relevant information exists that has not been disclosed before issuing the warrant and ordering placement. Lundy Bancroft & Jay G. Silverman, The Batterer as Parent: Addressing the Impact of Domestic Violence on Family Dynamics 73, 75 (2002) (indicating that most parental abductions take place in the context of a history of domestic violence because threatening to take the child from the mother is a form of control).

Some courts have computer terminals on the bench and a database search takes seconds. Courts without computer access can seek the assistance of law enforcement. Unless impracticable, the court should conduct a search of all person databases of the National Crime Information Center system, including the protection order file, the historical protection order file, the warrants file, the sex offender registry, and the persons on supervised release file. In addition, it is recommended that courts run searches in the National Law Enforcement Telecommunication System in the petitioner’s state of birth, current state of residence, and other recent states of residence. Civil courts are authorized by statute and National Crime Information Center policy to have access to information in several files for domestic violence and stalking cases. Because child abduction involves family members and can harm children, and violence between the parents is often a factor leading to child abduction, cases in which a parent alleges a risk of wrongful removal should permit access to the relevant databases.

The court should also view comparable state databases, such as the state department of social service registry of persons found to have abused or neglected children. If the petitioner or respondent are listed for a reason related to a crime of domestic or family violence, the court may refuse to issue a warrant or order any appropriate placement authorized under the laws of the state. The warrant must provide for the placement of a child pending the hearing. Temporary placement will most often be with the petitioner unless the database check reveals the petitioner is a likely or known abuser.

The court must state the reasons for issuance of the warrant. The warrant can be enforced by law enforcement officers wherever the child is found in the state. The warrant may authorize entry upon private property to pick up the child if no less intrusive means are possible. In extraordinary cases, the warrant may authorize law enforcement to make a forcible entry at any hour. This section also authorizes law enforcement officers to enforce out of state warrants.

This section of the Act applies only to wrongful removals, not wrongful retentions. It does not hinder a court from issuing any other immediate ex parte relief to prevent a wrongful removal or retention as may be allowed under law other than this act.