Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Colorado opinions name it 1 courts 2007–2026 7 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. Venzorgreen2 sentences2021Pe ople v. Venzor , 121 P.3d 260 , 2 62 (Colo. App. 2005). ¶ 12 As presented in Nardello’s motion, the claim that postconviction counsel provided ineffective assistance merely states that postconviction counsel failed to investigate trial counsel’s ineffectiveness for failing to object to restitution. 2009See People *339 v. Long, 126 P.3d 284, 286 (Colo.App.2005) (whether a postconviction motion states a claim for relief is a legal determination subject to de novo review); People v. Venzor, 121 P.3d 260, 262 (Colo.App.2005) (denial of a postconviction motion without a hearing is appropriate if the claims raise an issue of law, or if the allegations asserted, even if true, do not provide a basis for relief). | 2 | 3 |
People v. Trujillogreen2 sentences2024People v. Trujillo , 169 P.3d 235, 237 (Colo. Ap p. 2007) . ¶ 12 A defendant has three years to collaterally attack a final judgment for a class 5 felony. § 16-5- 40 2(1), C.R.S. 2023. 2024People v. Trujillo , 169 P.3d 235, 237 (Colo. Ap p. 2007) . ¶ 12 A defendant has three years to collaterally attack a final judgment for a class 5 felony. § 16-5- 40 2(1), C.R.S. 2023. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Caligreen2 sentences2026People v. Cali, 2020 CO 20, ¶ 14 . ¶ 10 The substance of a postconviction motion controls whether it falls under Crim. 2025See People v. Cali, 2020 CO 20, ¶ 14 . | 1 | 2 |
People v. Chavarria-Sanchezgreen1 sentence2026See People v. Chavarria-Sanchez, 207 P.3d 902, 904 (Colo. App. 2009); 3 see also People v. Castillo, 2022 COA 20 , ¶ 15 (de novo review applies to the denial of a postconviction motion without a hearing). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Torrezgreen1 sentence2024Cf. People v. Torrez, 2013 COA 37, ¶ 92 (reversing the defendant’s sentence but declining to remand for resentencing where the trial court “clearly and unequivocally stated that it intended to impose the maximum 33 sentence,” and instead correcting the sentence on appeal to achieve the maximum possible lawful sentence); see also Ardolino v. People, 69 P.3d 73, 77 (Colo. 2003) (denial of a postconviction motion without a hearing is justified if the existing record establishes that the defendant’s factual allegations, even if proved true, would fail to demonstrate prejudice). | 1 | 1 |
Ardolino v. Peoplegreen1 sentence2024Cf. People v. Torrez, 2013 COA 37, ¶ 92 (reversing the defendant’s sentence but declining to remand for resentencing where the trial court “clearly and unequivocally stated that it intended to impose the maximum 33 sentence,” and instead correcting the sentence on appeal to achieve the maximum possible lawful sentence); see also Ardolino v. People, 69 P.3d 73, 77 (Colo. 2003) (denial of a postconviction motion without a hearing is justified if the existing record establishes that the defendant’s factual allegations, even if proved true, would fail to demonstrate prejudice). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Longgreen1 sentence2009See People *339 v. Long, 126 P.3d 284, 286 (Colo.App.2005) (whether a postconviction motion states a claim for relief is a legal determination subject to de novo review); People v. Venzor, 121 P.3d 260, 262 (Colo.App.2005) (denial of a postconviction motion without a hearing is appropriate if the claims raise an issue of law, or if the allegations asserted, even if true, do not provide a basis for relief). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Steward v. People
green
2 sentences2016With regard to trial strategy, defense counsel has final authority to make strategic or tactical decisions, including "what strategy should be employed in the defense of the case." Arko v. People , 183 P.3d 555 , 558 (Colo. 2008) (quoting Steward v. People , 179 Colo. 31 , 34, 498 P.2d 933 , 934 (1972) ). ¶ 18 A district court may deny a postconviction motion without a hearing for a number of reasons. 2016With regard to trial strategy, defense counsel has final authority to make strategic or tactical decisions, including "what strategy should be employed in the defense of the case." Arko v. People , 183 P.3d 555 , 558 (Colo. 2008) (quoting Steward v. People , 179 Colo. 31 , 34, 498 P.2d 933 , 934 (1972) ). ¶ 18 A district court may deny a postconviction motion without a hearing for a number of reasons. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Arko v. People
green
1 sentence2016With regard to trial strategy, defense counsel has final authority to make strategic or tactical decisions, including "what strategy should be employed in the defense of the case." Arko v. People , 183 P.3d 555 , 558 (Colo. 2008) (quoting Steward v. People , 179 Colo. 31 , 34, 498 P.2d 933 , 934 (1972) ). ¶ 18 A district court may deny a postconviction motion without a hearing for a number of reasons. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.