stock instruction (Colorado) · Go Syfert
← Colorado issues

stock instruction in Colorado

13 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1956–2021 1 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 (5)

CaseFollowedCited
People v. Estorgagreen
colo · 1980 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
2 sentences

2018See Estorga, 200 Colo. at 82 , 612 P.2d at 523 . ¶ 42 Additionally, the obviousness of the problem is further evidenced by our supreme court’s criminal jury instructions committee providing a stock instruction for trial courts to use in cases where the evidence raises a duplicity issue.

2018See Estorga, 200 Colo. at 82 , 612 P.2d at 523 . ¶ 42 Additionally, the obviousness of the problem is further evidenced by our supreme court’s criminal jury instructions committee providing a stock instruction for trial courts to use in cases where the evidence raises a duplicity issue.

11
Lee v. Peoplegreen
colo · 1969 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
2 sentences

2011The court repeated for a third time that the instruction would not be given because neither party submitted it, but the parties would be allowed to "accurately argue the law concerning the use of a felony conviction as it bears on credibility." Despite the court's permission to do so, neither party argued the substance of the stock instruction during closing argument. - Assuming, without deciding, that the court's failure to give the requested stock instruction constituted error, see Lee v. People, 170 Colo. 268, 277 , 460 P.2d 796, 800 (1969); People v. Garcia, 981 P.2d 214, 216 (Colo.App.199

2011The court repeated for a third time that the instruction would not be given because neither party submitted it, but the parties would be allowed to "accurately argue the law concerning the use of a felony conviction as it bears on credibility." Despite the court's permission to do so, neither party argued the substance of the stock instruction during closing argument. - Assuming, without deciding, that the court's failure to give the requested stock instruction constituted error, see Lee v. People, 170 Colo. 268, 277 , 460 P.2d 796, 800 (1969); People v. Garcia, 981 P.2d 214, 216 (Colo.App.199

11
People v. Garciagreen
coloctapp · 1998 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
1 sentence

2011The court repeated for a third time that the instruction would not be given because neither party submitted it, but the parties would be allowed to "accurately argue the law concerning the use of a felony conviction as it bears on credibility." Despite the court's permission to do so, neither party argued the substance of the stock instruction during closing argument. - Assuming, without deciding, that the court's failure to give the requested stock instruction constituted error, see Lee v. People, 170 Colo. 268, 277 , 460 P.2d 796, 800 (1969); People v. Garcia, 981 P.2d 214, 216 (Colo.App.199

11
Wells v. Peoplegreen
colo · 1979 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1979–1979
1 sentence

1979See also Wells v. People, Colo., 592 P.2d 1321 (announced April 9, 1979, modified April 19, 1979).

11
Renfrow v. Peoplegreen
colo · 1971 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1972–1972
2 sentences

1972See also, Renfrow v. People, 176 Colo. 160 , 489 P.2d 582 .

1972See also, Renfrow v. People, 176 Colo. 160 , 489 P.2d 582 .

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 (11)

CaseCitedYears
Martinez v. People green
colo · 1970
2 sentences

1979In Martinez v. People, 172 Colo. 82 , 470 P.2d 26 (1970), the Court disapproved the wording of the former stock instruction on the presumption of innocence, but the Court specifically indicated that the revised instruction *940 should be given "in all future cases." In English, supra, the Court reaffirmed that the rule in Martinez was prospective only.

1979In Martinez v. People, 172 Colo. 82 , 470 P.2d 26 (1970), the Court disapproved the wording of the former stock instruction on the presumption of innocence, but the Court specifically indicated that the revised instruction *940 should be given "in all future cases." In English, supra, the Court reaffirmed that the rule in Martinez was prospective only.

31972–2015
People v. Ford green
colo · 1977
2 sentences

2014We find nothing in People v. Ford, 198 Colo. 459 , 568 P.2d 26 (1977), from which the stock instruction is drawn, that altered Blue's position that the affirmative defense to POWPO was grounded in the choice of evils statute.

2012As an intermediate court of appeals, we must therefore adhere to Ford 's description of section 13 as preserving the right of even previous offenders to keep arms where the defendant's "purpose in possessing weapons was the defense of his home, person, and property." Ford, 193 Colo. at 462 , 568 P.2d at 28 . 1 ¶ 19 Therefore, we conclude the trial court erred in modifying the stock instruction to include a "threat of imminent harm" requirement.

22012–2014
Riley v. People green
colo · 2011
2 sentences

2021Id. at 1093 .

2021In making this determination, you are to consider the totality of the circumstances shown by the evidence.” (Emphasis added.) This instruction is in all material respects identical to the instruction given, and approved of, in Riley. 13 ¶ 28 In sum, the supreme court has held that a specific apparent necessity instruction is never required, Beckett, 800 P.2d at 77-78 , though such an instruction may be sufficient to supplement the stock instruction in a multiple assailant case, Riley, 266 P.3d at 1095 .

12021–2021
Beckett v. People green
colo · 1990
1 sentence

2021In making this determination, you are to consider the totality of the circumstances shown by the evidence.” (Emphasis added.) This instruction is in all material respects identical to the instruction given, and approved of, in Riley. 13 ¶ 28 In sum, the supreme court has held that a specific apparent necessity instruction is never required, Beckett, 800 P.2d at 77-78 , though such an instruction may be sufficient to supplement the stock instruction in a multiple assailant case, Riley, 266 P.3d at 1095 .

12021–2021
People v. Blue green
colo · 1975
2 sentences

2012The court, relying on language in People v. Blue, 190 Colo. 95 , 544 P.2d 385 (1975), analogized this case involving the section 13 affirmative defense to cases involving the affirmative defense of choice of evils under section 18-1-702, C.R.S.2011.

2012The court, relying on language in People v. Blue, 190 Colo. 95 , 544 P.2d 385 (1975), analogized this case involving the section 13 affirmative defense to cases involving the affirmative defense of choice of evils under section 18-1-702, C.R.S.2011.

12012–2012
People v. Bennett green
colo · 1973
2 sentences

1999See COLJI-Cnm No. 4:01 (1983); People v. Bennett, 183 Colo. 125 , 515 P.2d 466 (1973).

1999See COLJI-Cnm No. 4:01 (1983); People v. Bennett, 183 Colo. 125 , 515 P.2d 466 (1973).

11999–1999
People v. Schwartz green
colo · 1984
1 sentence

1987People v. Schwartz, supra; People v. Lewis, supra. Here, while it was error for the trial court to give the above instruction without first questioning the jurors concerning the unlikelihood of progress towards a unanimous verdict upon further deliberations, we conclude that the stock instruction as given had little if any coercive effect.

11987–1987
People v. Lewis green
colo · 1984
1 sentence

1987People v. Schwartz, supra; People v. Lewis, supra. Here, while it was error for the trial court to give the above instruction without first questioning the jurors concerning the unlikelihood of progress towards a unanimous verdict upon further deliberations, we conclude that the stock instruction as given had little if any coercive effect.

11987–1987
Block v. People green
colo · 1951
2 sentences

1966Instructions defining crimes in this way have repeatedly been held proper, e.g., Block v. People, 125 Colo. 36 , 240 P.2d 512 ; Stoltz v. People, 59 Colo, 342, 148 Pac. 865 .

1966Instructions defining crimes in this way have repeatedly been held proper, e.g., Block v. People, 125 Colo. 36 , 240 P.2d 512 ; Stoltz v. People, 59 Colo, 342, 148 Pac. 865 .

11966–1966
Van Houton v. People neutral
colo · 1895
2 sentences

1961As early as 1895 in the case of Van Houton v. People, 22 Colo. 53, 43 Pac. 137 , the instruction received the sanction of this court.

1961As early as 1895 in the case of Van Houton v. People, 22 Colo. 53 , 43 P. 137 , the instruction received the sanction of this court.

11961–1961
Carr v. Boyd green
colo · 1951
2 sentences

1956In this connection we quote from the brief of counsel as follows: “Plaintiffs’ counsel states without any hestitation and with a clear recollection of the procedure, that both of the instructions covered in Plaintiffs’ Motion for a New Trial [No. 4 and No. 17] were objected to when offered by the Defendant, and that Court’s Instruction No. 10 is a stock instruction, to which there was no objection.” Nevertheless it is frankly admitted that counsel might, have erred in identifying the instruction to which objection was made, and in the reply brief counsel states, inter alia: “We again acknowled

1956In this connection we quote from the brief of counsel as follows: “Plaintiffs’ counsel states without any hestitation and with a clear recollection of the procedure, that both of the instructions covered in Plaintiffs’ Motion for a New Trial [No. 4 and No. 17] were objected to when offered by the Defendant, and that Court’s Instruction No. 10 is a stock instruction, to which there was no objection.” Nevertheless it is frankly admitted that counsel might, have erred in identifying the instruction to which objection was made, and in the reply brief counsel states, inter alia: “We again acknowled

11956–1956

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CO § Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1-704 (4)

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.

Where else courts name it

IL 13 (1905–2024) CO 13 (1956–2021) IA 9 (1904–2019) NM 9 (1921–2026) CA 7 (1946–2013) PA 7 (1904–2014) TX 5 (1913–2007) MT 3 (1919–2011) VA 3 (1929–1948) IN 3 (1938–1979) MO 2 (1950–1958) WV 2 (1995–1995) GA 2 (1927–2000) OH 2 (1910–2021) SD 2 (1915–1966) AZ 2 (1995–2009) OK 2 (1967–1991) MD 2 (1912–2009) KS 2 (1926–1991) UT 2 (1953–1999) NJ 2 (1970–1974)

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