without hearing (Colorado) · Go Syfert
← Colorado issues

without hearing in Colorado

10 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1959–2024 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 (8)

CaseFollowedCited
Blecha v. Peoplegreen
colo · 1998 · cited in 3 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2005–2013
2 sentences

2013See id. (citing Blecha v. People, 962 P.2d 931, 942 (Colo. 1998)). 118 At trial, the alternative source evidence was central to the defense and therefore pivotal to the jury's resolution of defendant's case.

2006See Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , 113 S.Ct. 2078 . *134 We are guided in our analysis by various factors “including the importance of the witness’ testimony to the prosecution’s case, whether the testimony was cumulative, the presence or absence of corroborating or contradictory evidence on the material points of the witness’ testimony, the extent of the cross-examination otherwise permitted, and the overall strength of the prosecution’s case.” Blecha, 962 P.2d at 942 (citing Merritt v. People, 842 P.2d 162 (Colo.1992)).

23
Kendrick v. Pippingreen
colo · 2011 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
2 sentences

2024Kendrick , 252 P.3d at 1063 .

2024Kendrick , 252 P.3d at 1063.

11
Aldrich v. DIST. CT. OF EIGHTEENTH JUD. DIST.green
colo · 1986 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015Aldrich, 714 P2d at 1323. 'To the extent the trial court did not consider the allegations set forth in the affidavit when it denied defendant's motion for a new trial without a hearing, we conclude that it erred.

2015Cf. Destination Travel, Inc. v. McElhanon, 799 P.2d 454, 457 (Colo.App.1990) ("[The statements attributed to the jurors in: the affidavits" of defendant's attorney "are admissible ... on the question of whether the Jury discussed or considered matters beyond the evidence admitted at trial." (clung Aldrich, 714 P.2d at 1323)).

11
Destination Travel, Inc. v. McElhanongreen
coloctapp · 1990 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015Cf. Destination Travel, Inc. v. McElhanon, 799 P.2d 454, 457 (Colo.App.1990) ("[The statements attributed to the jurors in: the affidavits" of defendant's attorney "are admissible ... on the question of whether the Jury discussed or considered matters beyond the evidence admitted at trial." (clung Aldrich, 714 P.2d at 1323)).

11
Bernal v. Peoplegreen
colo · 2002 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
2 sentences

2013Under this standard, reversal is required unless we are "confident beyond a reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to the guilty verdict." Bernal, 44 P.3d at 200 . - This test is not whether a guilty verdict would surely have been rendered in a trial without the error, but rather whether the guilty verdict in this trial was surely unattributable to the error.

2013See id. (citing Blecha v. People, 962 P.2d 931, 942 (Colo. 1998)). 118 At trial, the alternative source evidence was central to the defense and therefore pivotal to the jury's resolution of defendant's case.

11
Sullivan v. Louisianagreen
scotus · 1993 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
2 sentences

2006See Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , 113 S.Ct. 2078 . *134 We are guided in our analysis by various factors “including the importance of the witness’ testimony to the prosecution’s case, whether the testimony was cumulative, the presence or absence of corroborating or contradictory evidence on the material points of the witness’ testimony, the extent of the cross-examination otherwise permitted, and the overall strength of the prosecution’s case.” Blecha, 962 P.2d at 942 (citing Merritt v. People, 842 P.2d 162 (Colo.1992)).

2006See Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , 113 S.Ct. 2078 . *134 We are guided in our analysis by various factors “including the importance of the witness’ testimony to the prosecution’s case, whether the testimony was cumulative, the presence or absence of corroborating or contradictory evidence on the material points of the witness’ testimony, the extent of the cross-examination otherwise permitted, and the overall strength of the prosecution’s case.” Blecha, 962 P.2d at 942 (citing Merritt v. People, 842 P.2d 162 (Colo.1992)).

11
Merritt v. Peoplegreen
colo · 1992 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
1 sentence

2006See Sullivan, 508 U.S. at 279 , 113 S.Ct. 2078 . *134 We are guided in our analysis by various factors “including the importance of the witness’ testimony to the prosecution’s case, whether the testimony was cumulative, the presence or absence of corroborating or contradictory evidence on the material points of the witness’ testimony, the extent of the cross-examination otherwise permitted, and the overall strength of the prosecution’s case.” Blecha, 962 P.2d at 942 (citing Merritt v. People, 842 P.2d 162 (Colo.1992)).

11
People v. Miltongreen
colo · 1987 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
1 sentence

1996See People v. Milton, 732 P.2d 1199 (Colo.1987).

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 (5)

CaseCitedYears
De Baca v. District Court green
colo · 1967
2 sentences

1969We affirmed the denial in DeBaca v. District Court, 163 Colo. 516 , 431 P.2d 763 .

1969We affirmed the denial in DeBaca v. District Court, 163 Colo. 516 , 431 P.2d 763 .

21969–1969
Raile v. People green
colo · 2006
1 sentence

2016The question, then, is not "whether a guilty verdict would have been rendered in a trial without the error, but what effect the error had on this verdict." Raile v. People , 148 P.3d 126 , 133 (Colo. 2006).

12016–2016
People v. Harris green
colo · 2002
1 sentence

2005Bernal v. People, supra; People v. Harris, 43 P.3d 221 (Colo.2002); Blecha v. People, 962 P.2d 931 (Colo.1998).

12005–2005
People v. Scheidt green
· 1974
2 sentences

1996In addition, citing People v. Scheldt, 187 Colo. 20 , 528 P.2d 232 (1974), defendant argues that his motion for a new trial should be treated as a Crim.

1996In addition, citing People v. Scheldt, 187 Colo. 20 , 528 P.2d 232 (1974), defendant argues that his motion for a new trial should be treated as a Crim.

11996–1996
Bostic v. Bryan neutral
ala · 1955
1 sentence

1959Also, it has been held that the reviewing court has no power to enter a judgment on the merits of the controversy, nor to direct the respondent to enter any particular order or judgment. * * In Ruth v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., 83 So. (2d) 796 (Fla.), the court said: “It also follows that appellee’s contention that the earlier certiorari proceedings referred to ‘was actually an appeal from a final judgment’ and that the denial of the requested writ amounted to an affirmance thereof by this court is without legal efficacy.

11959–1959

Where else courts name it

IL 47 (1922–2026) AL 33 (1872–2016) TX 26 (1910–2025) FL 23 (1933–2024) OH 22 (1992–2026) UT 22 (1983–2026) CA 20 (1919–2024) NY 18 (1873–2016) ID 18 (1926–2024) TN 15 (1965–2021) WA 15 (1911–2024) GA 14 (1925–2026) MI 13 (1928–2015) PA 13 (1869–2017) MA 13 (1914–2025) OK 10 (1910–2021) CO 10 (1959–2024) DC 9 (1977–2020) NE 8 (1884–1987) MT 8 (1994–2012) LA 7 (1931–2015) AZ 7 (1970–2020) VA 6 (1928–2002) RI 6 (1984–2003) VT 5 (1945–2025) WV 5 (2006–2025) SC 5 (1957–1978) MS 5 (1911–2019) MD 3 (1940–2014) IN 3 (1945–2014) MO 3 (1979–1996) WY 3 (1931–1999) OR 3 (1962–2012) KY 3 (1912–1922) CT 3 (1999–2025) NC 3 (1990–1992) WI 3 (1891–2018) MN 3 (1897–1989) IA 3 (1865–2017) ND 2 (1953–1956) NH 2 (1889–1982) KS 2 (2022–2022)

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