14 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1938–2025 2 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Lovatogreen1 sentence2025See People v. Lovato, 2014 COA 113, ¶ 63 (“In considering whether prosecutorial remarks are improper, the reviewing court must weigh the effect of those remarks on the trial, and also take into account defense counsel’s ‘opening salvo.’”) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Turriettagreen1 sentence2024In United States v. Turrietta, 696 F.3d 972, 973 (10th Cir. 2012) — relied on by the Attorney General — the Tenth Circuit dealt with a situation in which defense counsel failed to raise an objection to the unsworn jury until after the guilty verdict was 15 reached. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Lindellgreen2 sentences2014Some courts have also suggested that prejudice may be shown where a court repeatedly and deliberately denies meritorious challenges for cause so as to force the defendant to use his peremptory challenges, see, e.g., Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. at 316 , 120 S.Ct. 774 ; Ross, 487 U.S. at 91 n. 5, 108 S.Ct. 2273 ; Novotny, ¶ 23 (distinguishing the situation in that case from a situation where a violation of statutes or rules prescribing the use of peremptory challenges is committed "in other than good faith"); State v. Lindell, 245 Wis.2d 689 , 629 N.W.2d 223, 245 (2001), or where a properly exerc 2014Some courts have also suggested that prejudice may be shown where a court repeatedly and deliberately denies meritorious challenges for cause so as to force the defendant to use his peremptory challenges, see, e.g., Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. at 316 , 120 S.Ct. 774 ; Ross, 487 U.S. at 91 n. 5, 108 S.Ct. 2273 ; Novotny, ¶ 23 (distinguishing the situation in that case from a situation where a violation of statutes or rules prescribing the use of peremptory challenges is committed "in other than good faith"); State v. Lindell, 245 Wis.2d 689 , 629 N.W.2d 223, 245 (2001), or where a properly exerc | 1 | 1 |
State v. Torresgreen2 sentences2006See United States v. Lott, supra, 310 F.3d at 1250-51 ; see also State v. Torres, 208 Ariz. 340 , 93 P.3d 1056, 1059-60 (2004)(rejecting assertion that trial court’s failure to inquire was structural error, in part because there was always the possibility that the defendant would not have been entitled to substitution of counsel). *656 Consequently, we, like the courts in Lott and Torres , conclude a trial court’s error in failing to inquire is subject to harmless error review. 2006See United States v. Lott, supra, 310 F.3d at 1250-51 ; see also State v. Torres, 208 Ariz. 340 , 93 P.3d 1056, 1059-60 (2004)(rejecting assertion that trial court’s failure to inquire was structural error, in part because there was always the possibility that the defendant would not have been entitled to substitution of counsel). *656 Consequently, we, like the courts in Lott and Torres , conclude a trial court’s error in failing to inquire is subject to harmless error review. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Gary Allen Lott, United States of America v. Johnny Marton Lott, AKA Johnny Martin Lottgreen1 sentence2006See United States v. Lott, supra, 310 F.3d at 1250-51 ; see also State v. Torres, 208 Ariz. 340 , 93 P.3d 1056, 1059-60 (2004)(rejecting assertion that trial court’s failure to inquire was structural error, in part because there was always the possibility that the defendant would not have been entitled to substitution of counsel). *656 Consequently, we, like the courts in Lott and Torres , conclude a trial court’s error in failing to inquire is subject to harmless error review. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Hankinsgreen1 sentence2014Some courts have also suggested that prejudice may be shown where a court repeatedly and deliberately denies meritorious challenges for cause so as to force the defendant to use his peremptory challenges, see, e.g., Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. at 316 , 120 S.Ct. 774 ; Ross, 487 U.S. at 91 n. 5, 108 S.Ct. 2273 ; Novotny, ¶ 23 (distinguishing the situation in that case from a situation where a violation of statutes or rules prescribing the use of peremptory challenges is committed "in other than good faith"); State v. Lindell, 245 Wis.2d 689 , 629 N.W.2d 223, 245 (2001), or where a properly exerc | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld
green
2 sentences1977Their fitness though affirmed was not found to be in the best interests of the child for legal custody when compared to the [Rutters].” The father also argues that Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, 420 U.S. 636 , 95 S.Ct. 1225 , 43 L.Ed.2d 514 (1975), supports his position. 1977Their fitness though affirmed was not found to be in the best interests of the child for legal custody when compared to the [Rutters].” The father also argues that Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, 420 U.S. 636 , 95 S.Ct. 1225 , 43 L.Ed.2d 514 (1975), supports his position. | 2 | 1977–1977 |
State v. Hickman
green
1 sentence2014Some courts have also suggested that prejudice may be shown where a court repeatedly and deliberately denies meritorious challenges for cause so as to force the defendant to use his peremptory challenges, see, e.g., Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. at 316 , 120 S.Ct. 774 ; Ross, 487 U.S. at 91 n. 5, 108 S.Ct. 2273 ; Novotny, ¶ 23 (distinguishing the situation in that case from a situation where a violation of statutes or rules prescribing the use of peremptory challenges is committed "in other than good faith"); State v. Lindell, 245 Wis.2d 689 , 629 N.W.2d 223, 245 (2001), or where a properly exerc | 1 | 2014–2014 |
United States v. Martinez-Salazar
green
2 sentences2014Some courts have also suggested that prejudice may be shown where a court repeatedly and deliberately denies meritorious challenges for cause so as to force the defendant to use his peremptory challenges, see, e.g., Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. at 316 , 120 S.Ct. 774 ; Ross, 487 U.S. at 91 n. 5, 108 S.Ct. 2273 ; Novotny, ¶ 23 (distinguishing the situation in that case from a situation where a violation of statutes or rules prescribing the use of peremptory challenges is committed "in other than good faith"); State v. Lindell, 245 Wis.2d 689 , 629 N.W.2d 223, 245 (2001), or where a properly exerc 2014Some courts have also suggested that prejudice may be shown where a court repeatedly and deliberately denies meritorious challenges for cause so as to force the defendant to use his peremptory challenges, see, e.g., Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. at 316 , 120 S.Ct. 774 ; Ross, 487 U.S. at 91 n. 5, 108 S.Ct. 2273 ; Novotny, ¶ 23 (distinguishing the situation in that case from a situation where a violation of statutes or rules prescribing the use of peremptory challenges is committed "in other than good faith"); State v. Lindell, 245 Wis.2d 689 , 629 N.W.2d 223, 245 (2001), or where a properly exerc | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Ross v. Oklahoma
green
2 sentences2014Some courts have also suggested that prejudice may be shown where a court repeatedly and deliberately denies meritorious challenges for cause so as to force the defendant to use his peremptory challenges, see, e.g., Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. at 316 , 120 S.Ct. 774 ; Ross, 487 U.S. at 91 n. 5, 108 S.Ct. 2273 ; Novotny, ¶ 23 (distinguishing the situation in that case from a situation where a violation of statutes or rules prescribing the use of peremptory challenges is committed "in other than good faith"); State v. Lindell, 245 Wis.2d 689 , 629 N.W.2d 223, 245 (2001), or where a properly exerc 2014Some courts have also suggested that prejudice may be shown where a court repeatedly and deliberately denies meritorious challenges for cause so as to force the defendant to use his peremptory challenges, see, e.g., Martinez-Salazar, 528 U.S. at 316 , 120 S.Ct. 774 ; Ross, 487 U.S. at 91 n. 5, 108 S.Ct. 2273 ; Novotny, ¶ 23 (distinguishing the situation in that case from a situation where a violation of statutes or rules prescribing the use of peremptory challenges is committed "in other than good faith"); State v. Lindell, 245 Wis.2d 689 , 629 N.W.2d 223, 245 (2001), or where a properly exerc | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Minnesota v. Murphy
green
2 sentences1997Id. at 427-29 , 104 S.Ct. at 1142-43 . 1997Id. at 427-29 , 104 S.Ct. at 1142-43 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
In Re the Marraige of Wall
green
2 sentences1995The conflict between Murphy and Wall I has been resolved and the uncertainty of the standard to be applied has been settled by In re Marriage of Wall, 868 P.2d 387 (Colo.1994) (W all II). 1995The conflict between Murphy and Wall I has been resolved and the uncertainty of the standard to be applied has been settled by In re Marriage of Wall, 868 P.2d 387 (Colo. 1994) ( Wall II ). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Iacino v. Brown
green
2 sentences1988Iacino v. Brown, 121 Colo. 450 , 217 P.2d 266 (1950). 1988Iacino v. Brown, 121 Colo. 450 , 217 P.2d 266 (1950). | 1 | 1988–1988 |
People v. Burley
green
1 sentence1984Her presence “may be extremely important to government counsel” because “having lived with the case for a long time, [she] may be able to assist in meeting trial surprises where the best-prepared counsel would otherwise have difficulty,” and, in relation to government counsel, her presence “compares with the situation defense counsel finds himself in — he always has the client with him to consult during the trial.” See id. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
People Ex Rel. Farina v. District Court of 21st Jud. Dist.
green
2 sentences1982Farina v. District Court, 185 Colo. 118 , 522 P.2d 589 (1974), the court dealt with a similar situation in which defense counsel appeared at a preliminary hearing without the defendant, claiming orally that the latter was waiving his right to appear. 1982Farina v. District Court, 185 Colo. 118 , 522 P.2d 589 (1974), the court dealt with a similar situation in which defense counsel appeared at a preliminary hearing without the defendant, claiming orally that the latter was waiving his right to appear. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Nutt v. Davison
green
1 sentence1961Nutt v. Davison, 54 Colo. 586 , 131 Pac. 390 ; Wheelock Bros. | 1 | 1961–1961 |
Siebers v. Finance Corporation
neutral
2 sentences1941See, Code, section 425; Siebers v. Labor Finance Corporation, 100 Colo. 40 , 64 P. (2d) 1263 ; Martin v. Way, 86 Colo. 232 , 280 Pac. 488 ; Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee, 88 Colo. 300 , 295 Pac. 792 ; Andrews v. Loveland, 1 Colo. 8 , and Boxwell v. Greeley Bank, 89 Colo. 574 , 5 P. (2d) 868 . 1941See, Code, section 425; Siebers v. Labor Finance Corporation, 100 Colo. 40 , 64 P. (2d) 1263 ; Martin v. Way, 86 Colo. 232 , 280 Pac. 488 ; Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee, 88 Colo. 300 , 295 Pac. 792 ; Andrews v. Loveland, 1 Colo. 8 , and Boxwell v. Greeley Bank, 89 Colo. 574 , 5 P. (2d) 868 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Boxwell v. Greeley Union National Bank
neutral
2 sentences1941See, Code, section 425; Siebers v. Labor Finance Corporation, 100 Colo. 40 , 64 P. (2d) 1263 ; Martin v. Way, 86 Colo. 232 , 280 Pac. 488 ; Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee, 88 Colo. 300 , 295 Pac. 792 ; Andrews v. Loveland, 1 Colo. 8 , and Boxwell v. Greeley Bank, 89 Colo. 574 , 5 P. (2d) 868 . 1941See, Code, section 425; Siebers v. Labor Finance Corporation, 100 Colo. 40 , 64 P. (2d) 1263 ; Martin v. Way, 86 Colo. 232 , 280 Pac. 488 ; Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee, 88 Colo. 300 , 295 Pac. 792 ; Andrews v. Loveland, 1 Colo. 8 , and Boxwell v. Greeley Bank, 89 Colo. 574 , 5 P. (2d) 868 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee
neutral
2 sentences1941See, Code, section 425; Siebers v. Labor Finance Corporation, 100 Colo. 40 , 64 P. (2d) 1263 ; Martin v. Way, 86 Colo. 232 , 280 Pac. 488 ; Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee, 88 Colo. 300 , 295 Pac. 792 ; Andrews v. Loveland, 1 Colo. 8 , and Boxwell v. Greeley Bank, 89 Colo. 574 , 5 P. (2d) 868 . 1941See, Code, section 425; Siebers v. Labor Finance Corporation, 100 Colo. 40 , 64 P. (2d) 1263 ; Martin v. Way, 86 Colo. 232 , 280 Pac. 488 ; Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee, 88 Colo. 300 , 295 Pac. 792 ; Andrews v. Loveland, 1 Colo. 8 , and Boxwell v. Greeley Bank, 89 Colo. 574 , 5 P. (2d) 868 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Martin v. Way
green
2 sentences1941See, Code, section 425; Siebers v. Labor Finance Corporation, 100 Colo. 40 , 64 P. (2d) 1263 ; Martin v. Way, 86 Colo. 232 , 280 Pac. 488 ; Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee, 88 Colo. 300 , 295 Pac. 792 ; Andrews v. Loveland, 1 Colo. 8 , and Boxwell v. Greeley Bank, 89 Colo. 574 , 5 P. (2d) 868 . 1941See, Code, section 425; Siebers v. Labor Finance Corporation, 100 Colo. 40 , 64 P. (2d) 1263 ; Martin v. Way, 86 Colo. 232 , 280 Pac. 488 ; Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee, 88 Colo. 300 , 295 Pac. 792 ; Andrews v. Loveland, 1 Colo. 8 , and Boxwell v. Greeley Bank, 89 Colo. 574 , 5 P. (2d) 868 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Andrews v. Loveland
neutral
1 sentence1941See, Code, section 425; Siebers v. Labor Finance Corporation, 100 Colo. 40 , 64 P. (2d) 1263 ; Martin v. Way, 86 Colo. 232 , 280 Pac. 488 ; Commercial Credit Co. v. Higbee, 88 Colo. 300 , 295 Pac. 792 ; Andrews v. Loveland, 1 Colo. 8 , and Boxwell v. Greeley Bank, 89 Colo. 574 , 5 P. (2d) 868 . | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Johnson v. Elliott
neutral
2 sentences1938This principle was restated and adhered to by this court in the case of Johnson v. Elliott, 76 Colo. 358 , 231 Pac. 675 , where it was held that one who permits promoters of an insurance corporation to represent to the insurance commissioner that securities, claimed by her, are assets of the company, upon which representation a license was issued to it, will not be heard to say, as against a policy holder, that the property belongs, not to the company, but to her. 1938This principle was restated and adhered to by this court in the case of Johnson v. Elliott, 76 Colo. 358 , 231 Pac. 675 , where it was held that one who permits promoters of an insurance corporation to represent to the insurance commissioner that securities, claimed by her, are assets of the company, upon which representation a license was issued to it, will not be heard to say, as against a policy holder, that the property belongs, not to the company, but to her. | 1 | 1938–1938 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.