Hill v. Miller, 578 P.2d 655 (Colo. 1978). · Go Syfert
Search
Hill v. Miller, 578 P.2d 655 (Colo. 1978). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
33 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: People v. Pate (colo, 2003-06-30)
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980 2003 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Pate (2×)
Colo. · 2003 · confidence medium
The officers were directed by a bleeding man to the specific apartment from which he had just emerged, at 3:00 in the morning, following a commotion witnessed first-hand by citizen-informants, who are considered reliable for purposes of probable cause, as a matter of law, see People v. Polander, 41 P.3d 698, 702 (Colo.2001); People v. Edmonds, 195 Colo. 358, 364 , 578 P.2d 655, 661 (1978), and found broken glass on a back "window.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Polander
Colo. · 2001 · confidence medium
Conversely, even if enough information were not known to fully credit an informant as being a "citizen-informant," whose veracity would automatically be accepted, see People v. Edmonds, 195 Colo. 358, 364 , 578 P.2d 655, 661 (1978) (finding disclosure of identity and place of employment sufficient to satisfy "first prong" of Aguilar-Spinelli test), a detailed description of the alleged wrongdoing, along with a statement that the event was observed firsthand, would entitle the information to more reliability than might otherwise be the case.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Donnelly
Colo. · 1984 · confidence medium
Moreover, in People v. Edmonds, 195 Colo. 358, 365 , 578 P.2d 655, 661 (1978), we made clear that the activity observed need not be criminal in itself in order to trigger the citizen-informer rule; it is sufficient if it is one of the circumstances which, when considered together, make up the criminal activity.
discussed Cited "see" People v. Ford (2×)
Colo. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
See People v. Edmonds, 195 Colo. 358 , 578 P.2d 655 (1978).
cited Cited "see" People v. Smith
Colo. · 1981 · signal: see · confidence high
See People v. Edmonds, 195 Colo. 358 , 578 P.2d 655 (1978).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Stellabotte
Colo. Ct. App. · 2016 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See People v. Cruz, 923 P.2d 311, 313 (Colo. App. 1996) (holding that court did not err in giving the jury a dictionary definition of an undefined element of a crime); see also People v. Martin, 851 P.2d 186, 189 (Colo. App. 1992). ¶ 33 Divisions of our court have defined “without authorization” in the context of theft statutes to mean “that the owner of the property, or a person in possession of the property with the owner’s consent, has not given the actor permission to exercise control over the property.” People v. McCormick, 784 P.2d 808, 810 (Colo. App. 1989) (quoting People v.…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Glenn M. Hill
v.
Arnold Miller, Sheriff of Arapahoe County
27909.
Supreme Court of Colorado.
May 15, 1978.
578 P.2d 655
John A. Purvis, State Public Defender, Craig L. Truman, Chief Deputy, Karl M. Gustafson, Deputy, for petitioner-appellant., J. D. MacFarlane, Attorney General, David W. Robbins, Deputy, Edward G. Donovan, Solicitor General, Anthony Marquez, Assistant, for respondent-appellee.
Kelley.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
MR. JUSTICE KELLEY

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This appeal concerns the sufficiency of extradition documents submitted by the State of Oklahoma to the Governor of the State of Colorado pursuant to section 16-19-104, C.R.S. 1973. At the hearing upon appellant Hill’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, he contended that the extradition documents were insufficient because the warrant issued on October 27, 1976, did not contain a contemporaneous affidavit establishing probable cause for the issuance of that warrant. Such an affidavit was filed on August 1, 1977. The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, ruling that the extradition documents viewed as a whole substantially complied with the statute. We affirm.

In Wood v. Leach, 189 Colo. 361, 540 P.2d 1084 (1975), we held that

“whether the affidavits establishing probable cause were executed before or after the charging document is immaterial, provided that the extradition documents, viewed in their entirety, establish probable cause that the person to be extradited committed the offense.” (citations omitted).

The documents in the instant case fulfilled this standard.

Accordingly, we affirm.