minimum standard (Colorado) · Go Syfert
← Colorado issues

minimum standard in Colorado

19 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2026 4 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Colorado courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (13)

CaseFollowedCited
Strickland v. Washingtongreen
scotus · 1984 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
2 sentences

2025Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-94 (1984); Dunlap v. People, 173 P.3d 1054, 1063 (Colo. 2007).

2025Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-94 (1984); Dunlap v. People, 173 P.3d 1054, 1063 (Colo. 2007).

22
Dunlap v. Peoplegreen
colo · 2007 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
2 sentences

2025Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-94 (1984); Dunlap v. People, 173 P.3d 1054, 1063 (Colo. 2007).

2025Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-94 (1984); Dunlap v. People, 173 P.3d 1054, 1063 (Colo. 2007).

22
Chambers v. Maroneygreen
scotus · 1970 · cited in 2 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2019–2025
2 sentences

2025Id. at 404-05 . ¶16 "In enforcing the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, the [Supreme] Court has insisted upon probable cause as a minimum requirement for a reasonable search permitted by the Constitution." Chambers v. Maroney , 399 U.S. 42, 51 (1970).

2019Id. ; see also Chambers v. Maroney , 399 U.S. 42 , 51, 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970) ("In enforcing the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Court has insisted upon probable cause as a minimum requirement for a reasonable search permitted by the Constitution.").

22
People v. Rostadgreen
colo · 1983 · cited in 3 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1984–1985
2 sentences

1985As we noted in People v. Rostad, 669 P.2d 126, 129 (Colo.1983), the minimum requirement for a strict liability offense in Colorado is the performance of a “voluntary act” — that is, “an act performed consciously as a result of effort or determination,” Even with the erroneous “should have been aware” language in the definitional *742 instruction on “knowingly,” the effect of this language was to impose upon the prosecution no less a burden than otherwise required for a voluntary act.

1984Section 18-1-503(2) addresses generally the construction of the provisions of the Colorado Criminal Code, with respect to culpability requirements and states as follows: “Although no culpable mental state is expressly designated in a statute defining an offense, a culpable mental state may nevertheless be required for the commission of that offense, or with respect to some or all of the material elements thereof, if the proscribed conduct necessarily involves such a culpable mental state.” (emphasis added) However, some offenses do not require proof of a “culpable mental state.” See generally

13
People v. Corsongreen
colo · 2016 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026“Ineffective assistance of counsel at the time a guilty plea is entered may constitute a fair and just reason to withdraw the plea prior to sentencing.” Kazadi, ¶ 21. ¶ 31 Claims of ineffective assistance within the context of a plea agreement require the defendant to allege facts that, if true, show 16 that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, in that it fell below the minimum standard guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment; and (2) counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced defendant, in that “there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty a

11
Hill v. Lockhartgreen
scotus · 1985 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026“Ineffective assistance of counsel at the time a guilty plea is entered may constitute a fair and just reason to withdraw the plea prior to sentencing.” Kazadi, ¶ 21. ¶ 31 Claims of ineffective assistance within the context of a plea agreement require the defendant to allege facts that, if true, show 16 that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, in that it fell below the minimum standard guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment; and (2) counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced defendant, in that “there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty a

11
Sprott v. Robertsgreen
colo · 1964 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
2 sentences

2016Taxation, 2013 CO 39, ¶ 12 , 304 P.3d 217, 221 ; Sprott v. Roberts, 154 Colo. 252 , 390 P.2d 465, 467 (Colo.1964) (quoting Conley's "no' set of facts" passage for the first time in a concurring opinion, while noting that "[this expresses the recognized way to test the suffi-clency of a claim, and it has been applied in a legion of cases in the lower federal courts").

2016Taxation, 2013 CO 39, ¶ 12 , 304 P.3d 217, 221 ; Sprott v. Roberts, 154 Colo. 252 , 390 P.2d 465, 467 (Colo.1964) (quoting Conley's "no' set of facts" passage for the first time in a concurring opinion, while noting that "[this expresses the recognized way to test the suffi-clency of a claim, and it has been applied in a legion of cases in the lower federal courts").

11
West v. Robertsgreen
colo · 2006 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
1 sentence

2007See West v. Roberts, supra, 143 P.3d at 1044 .

11
People v. Caddygreen
colo · 1975 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
2 sentences

2006Although legislative silence regarding mental state is not conclusive, “it is well settled that the legislature may make a prohibited act a crime, irrespective of the elements of intent or scienter, when public policy so requires.” People v. Caddy, 189 Colo. 353, 354-55 , 540 P.2d 1089, 1090 (1975). *555 Section 18-1-502, C.R.S. (2006), 4 sets forth the general requirements for criminal liability: The minimum requirement for criminal liability is the performance by a person of conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act which he is physically capable of performing.

2006Although legislative silence regarding mental state is not conclusive, “it is well settled that the legislature may make a prohibited act a crime, irrespective of the elements of intent or scienter, when public policy so requires.” People v. Caddy, 189 Colo. 353, 354-55 , 540 P.2d 1089, 1090 (1975). *555 Section 18-1-502, C.R.S. (2006), 4 sets forth the general requirements for criminal liability: The minimum requirement for criminal liability is the performance by a person of conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act which he is physically capable of performing.

11
Granbery v. DISTRICT CT. IN & FOR CITY & CTY. OF DENVERgreen
colo · 1975 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
2 sentences

2004Id. at 320 , 531 P.2d at 392 (reciting the minimum standard as set forth by the United States Supreme Court but noting that in Colorado "there is discretion in a trial court to order disclosure in additional situations where a showing of particularized need has not been made.”)

2004Id. at 320 , 531 P.2d at 392 (reciting the minimum standard as set forth by the United States Supreme Court but noting that in Colorado "there is discretion in a trial court to order disclosure in additional situations where a showing of particularized need has not been made.”)

11
Santosky v. Kramergreen
scotus · 1982 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000
2 sentences

2000See Santosky, 455 U.S. at 758, 769-70 , 102 S.Ct. 1388 .

2000See Santosky, 455 U.S. at 758, 769-70 , 102 S.Ct. 1388 .

11
Jersey City Redevelopment Agency v. Kuglergreen
nj · 1971 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991
2 sentences

1991Agency v. Kugler, 58 N.J. 374, 384 , 277 A.2d 873, 878 (1971) (legislature "may prescribe a rule of damages more favorable to the landowner than that which would satisfy the minimum requirement of the Constitution.").

1991Agency v. Kugler, 58 N.J. 374, 384 , 277 A.2d 873, 878 (1971) (legislature "may prescribe a rule of damages more favorable to the landowner than that which would satisfy the minimum requirement of the Constitution.").

11
People v. Harthungreen
colo · 1979 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
2 sentences

1980As we said in People v. Harthun, 197 Colo. 1 , 593 P.2d 324, 326 (1979): “DR 9-102(A) and DR 9-102(B)(3) require as a minimum standard of conduct that a lawyer segregate his clients’ funds from his own and keep them in identifiable bank trust accounts.

1980As we said in People v. Harthun, 197 Colo. 1 , 593 P.2d 324, 326 (1979): “DR 9-102(A) and DR 9-102(B)(3) require as a minimum standard of conduct that a lawyer segregate his clients’ funds from his own and keep them in identifiable bank trust accounts.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (9)

CaseCitedYears
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly green
scotus · 2007
2 sentences

2016While the Court openly conceded that the "nq set of facts" passage of Conley could be read in isolation as saying that any statement revealing the theory of the claim would suffice unless its factual impossibility could be shown from the face of the pleadings, and that. many courts had understood it precisely that way, id, at 561, 127 S.Ct. 1955 , in context, Conley "described the breadth of opportunity to prove what an adequate complaint claims, not the minimum standard of adequate pleading to govern a complaint's survival," id. at 563 , 127 S.Ct. 1955 . 11 Like many federal courts and other

2016While the Court openly conceded that the "nq set of facts" passage of Conley could be read in isolation as saying that any statement revealing the theory of the claim would suffice unless its factual impossibility could be shown from the face of the pleadings, and that. many courts had understood it precisely that way, id, at 561, 127 S.Ct. 1955 , in context, Conley "described the breadth of opportunity to prove what an adequate complaint claims, not the minimum standard of adequate pleading to govern a complaint's survival," id. at 563 , 127 S.Ct. 1955 . 11 Like many federal courts and other

22016–2016
United States v. Jones green
scotus · 2012
1 sentence

2025Id. at 404-05 . ¶16 "In enforcing the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, the [Supreme] Court has insisted upon probable cause as a minimum requirement for a reasonable search permitted by the Constitution." Chambers v. Maroney , 399 U.S. 42, 51 (1970).

12025–2025
Jones v. United States green
scotus · 1958
1 sentence

2019Id. ; see also Chambers v. Maroney , 399 U.S. 42 , 51, 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970) ("In enforcing the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Court has insisted upon probable cause as a minimum requirement for a reasonable search permitted by the Constitution.").

12019–2019
Qwest Corp. v. Colorado Division of Property Taxation green
colo · 2013
2 sentences

2016Taxation, 2013 CO 39, ¶ 12 , 304 P.3d 217, 221 ; Sprott v. Roberts, 154 Colo. 252 , 390 P.2d 465, 467 (Colo.1964) (quoting Conley's "no' set of facts" passage for the first time in a concurring opinion, while noting that "[this expresses the recognized way to test the suffi-clency of a claim, and it has been applied in a legion of cases in the lower federal courts").

2016Taxation, 2013 CO 39, ¶ 12 , 304 P.3d 217, 221 ; Sprott v. Roberts, 154 Colo. 252 , 390 P.2d 465, 467 (Colo.1964) (quoting Conley's "no' set of facts" passage for the first time in a concurring opinion, while noting that "[this expresses the recognized way to test the suffi-clency of a claim, and it has been applied in a legion of cases in the lower federal courts").

12016–2016
Cornell v. State Board of Pharmacy green
coloctapp · 1990
1 sentence

2002Contrary to the Agency's contention, we further conclude Cornell v. State Board of Pharmacy, supra, does not require or even suggest a different result.

12002–2002
Yenter v. Baker green
colo · 1952
2 sentences

1994In holding that where "the Constitution... sets a limitation, the legislature may not make any other limitation than those provided in the Constitution," id. at 241 , 248 P.2d at 316 , we relied on People v. McCormick, 261 Ill. 413 , 103 N.E. 1053 (1913).

1994In holding that where "the Constitution... sets a limitation, the legislature may not make any other limitation than those provided in the Constitution," id. at 241 , 248 P.2d at 316 , we relied on People v. McCormick, 261 Ill. 413 , 103 N.E. 1053 (1913).

11994–1994
People ex rel. Hoyne v. McCormick green
ill · 1913
2 sentences

1994In holding that where "the Constitution... sets a limitation, the legislature may not make any other limitation than those provided in the Constitution," id. at 241 , 248 P.2d at 316 , we relied on People v. McCormick, 261 Ill. 413 , 103 N.E. 1053 (1913).

1994In holding that where "the Constitution... sets a limitation, the legislature may not make any other limitation than those provided in the Constitution," id. at 241 , 248 P.2d at 316 , we relied on People v. McCormick, 261 Ill. 413 , 103 N.E. 1053 (1913).

11994–1994
Parlapiano v. District Court in & for Tenth Jud. Dist. green
colo · 1971
2 sentences

1975Parlapiano v. District Court, 176 Colo. 521 , 491 P.2d 965 (1971).

1975Parlapiano v. District Court, 176 Colo. 521 , 491 P.2d 965 (1971).

11975–1975
United States v. Robert L. Youngblood green
ca2 · 1967
1 sentence

1975Following the reasoning in United States v. Youngblood, 379 F.2d 365 (1967) we have held that the Supreme Court cases merely indicate a minimum standard, and that there is discretion in a trial court to order disclosure in additional situations where a showing of particularized need has not been made.

11975–1975

Where else courts name it

TX 134 (1885–2025) NY 103 (1926–2026) CA 93 (1943–2025) IL 92 (1956–2026) PA 73 (1942–2025) LA 67 (1959–2021) OH 51 (1948–2026) MO 47 (1941–2024) NJ 45 (1959–2026) FL 41 (1956–2026) MD 38 (1955–2025) WA 35 (1955–2025) TN 34 (1956–2023) MA 33 (1918–2025) GA 31 (1974–2025) NC 29 (1941–2022) OR 28 (1953–2026) MS 28 (1967–2020) MI 27 (1943–2021) ND 25 (1962–2016) NM 25 (1943–2025) CT 22 (1983–2026) AZ 20 (1971–2023) AL 20 (1926–2024) CO 19 (1975–2026) WI 17 (1969–2020) IA 16 (1961–2022) DC 16 (1950–2015) MT 16 (1925–2026) IN 16 (1953–2017) OK 16 (1945–2025) MN 14 (1960–2017) AK 14 (1961–2016) KS 12 (1967–2026) SC 11 (1987–2026) RI 11 (1977–2020) HI 11 (1961–2025) VA 11 (1955–2024) ID 10 (1967–2023) KY 10 (1923–2026) NE 9 (1942–2018) UT 9 (1978–2024) WV 8 (1968–2021) ME 8 (1973–2021) WY 8 (1981–2006) VT 8 (1988–2023) DE 6 (1971–2025) NH 5 (1945–2007) SD 4 (1980–2014) NV 3 (1981–2022) AR 3 (1982–2018) PR 2 (1943–1963)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check