Bell v. Bower, 606 P.2d 74 (Colo. 1980). · Go Syfert
Search
Bell v. Bower, 606 P.2d 74 (Colo. 1980). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
25 citation events (12 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: People v. Sandoval (coloctapp, 2016-04-21) · Strongest negative: Vazquez v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division (indctapp, 1985-12-30)
Treatment trajectory · 1984 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1984 2005 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "but see" Vazquez v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division
Ind. Ct. App. · 1985 · signal: but cf. · confidence high
But cf. Duenas-Rodriguez v. Industrial Commission of Colorado (1980) 199 Colo. 195 , 606 P.2d 437 (alien whose entry was illegal and who had no work authorization was unavailable for work and therefore ineligible to receive un *175 employment compensation benefits); Pinilla v. Board of Review in Department of Labor and Industry (1978) 155 N.J.Super. 307 , 382 A.2d 921 (affirming the denial of benefits to alien arrested as an illegal alien and not granted permission to work at any stage of the proceedings).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Sandoval (2×)
Colo. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
"The physical presence of the defendant in court confers jurisdiction over the person." People v. Garcia , 2013 COA 15, ¶ 15 (citing Bell v. Bower , 199 Colo. 195, 196 , 606 P.2d 74, 74 (1980)). ¶ 47 Of particular relevance here, a court’s lack of subject matter jurisdiction may not be waived and can be raised at any time in a proceeding, including for the first time on appeal.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Sandoval
Colo. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
“The physical presence of the defendant in court confers jurisdiction over the person.” People v. Garcia, 2013 COA 15, ¶ 15 , 320 P.3d 360 (citing Bell v. Bower, 199 Colo. 195, 196 , 606 P.2d 74, 74 (1980)). ¶ 47 Of particular relevance here, a court’s lack of subject matter jurisdiction may not be waived and can be raised at any time in a proceeding, including for the first time on appeal.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Sandoval
Colo. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
"The physical presence of the defendant in court confers jurisdiction over the person." People v. Garcia , 2013 COA 15, ¶15 (citing Bell v. Bower , 199 Colo. 195, 196 , 606 P.2d 74, 74 (1980)). ¶47 Of particular relevance here, a court’s lack of subject matter jurisdiction may not be waived and can be raised at any time in a proceeding, including for the first time on appeal.
cited Cited as authority (rule) People v. Garcia
Colo. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
Bell v. Bower, 199 Colo. 195, 196 , 606 P.2d 74, 74 (1980).
discussed Cited "see" Chatfield v. Colorado Court of Appeals (2×)
Colo. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
See Bell v. Bower, 199 Colo. 195, 196 , 606 P.2d 74, 74 (1980).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Greenwald (2×)
Colo. · 1985 · signal: see · confidence high
See Bell v. Bower, 199 Colo. 195 , 606 P.2d 74 (1980); Brown, 194 Colo. 225 , 571 P.2d 1091 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Melvin Bell
v.
Ernest D. Bower, Sheriff of Weld County
79SA90.
Supreme Court of Colorado.
Feb 11, 1980.
606 P.2d 74
Melvin Bell, Pro se., J. D. MacFarlane, Attorney General, Richard F. Hennessey, Deputy, Edward G. Donovan, Solicitor General, Lynn Ford, Assistant Attorney General, Litigation Section, for respondent-appellee.
Lee.
Cited by 13 opinions  |  Published
JUSTICE LEE

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Appellant Melvin Bell appeals from the dismissal by the district court of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. We affirm the district court.

Appellant was sentenced in federal court in Wyoming for violation of the Mann Act. While confined in the Laramie County Jail in Cheyenne, Wyoming, pending transfer to federal prison, and without the benefit of extradition proceedings, he was removed from the Wyoming jail by U. S. Marshalls and turned over to officers of the Weld County, Colorado, sheriffs department. He was then brought to Weld County and charged with first-degree sexual assault. After trial, he was convicted of second-degree sexual assault. Appellant petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus, contending that his Colorado conviction is invalid because he was unlawfully removed from Wyoming by the Weld County sheriff. We do not agree.

The law on this question is well established:

“The circumstances by which an accused person comes before a court have no bearing on the court’s power to try him. Frisbee v. Collins, 342 U.S. 519, 72 S.Ct. 509, 96 L.Ed. 541 (1952). A court which has jurisdiction of the subject matter of the criminal prosecution need not inquire how a defendant was brought before it; his presence in court is sufficient to confer jurisdiction over his person. Massey v. People, 179 Colo. 167, 498 P.2d 953 (1972); DeBaca v. Trujillo, 167 Colo. 311, 447 P.2d 533 (1968).” Brown v. Dist. Ct., 194 Colo. 225, 571 P.2d 1091 (1977).

The manner by which appellant was brought to Colorado, therefore, has no bearing on the validity of appellant’s conviction, and the district court was correct in dismissing the habeas corpus proceeding.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.