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.
9 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1970–2025 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. Naranjogreen1 sentence2025People v. Naranjo, 2015 COA 56, ¶ 11 (citations omitted.) In deciding whether the defendant is entitled to the proffered instruction, the court must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant. | 1 | 1 |
Mata-Medina v. Peoplegreen1 sentence2025Mata-Medina v. People, 71 P.3d 973, 979 (Colo. 2003). | 1 | 1 |
Lybarger v. Peoplegreen1 sentence2022As this court has previously stated, "a defendant may satisfy this burden even if the only supporting evidence is 'highly improbable' testimony from the defendant . . . ." Id. at ¶ 22, 428 P.3d at 545 (quoting Lybarger v. People , 807 P.2d 570, 579 (Colo. 1991)). | 1 | 1 |
Day v. Johnsongreen1 sentence2012We agree with Wolter that the court erred in rejecting the instruction. 118 The proffered instruction accurately states the law, see Day, 255 P.3d at 1069 ("a poor outcome does not, standing alone, constitute negligence"); the evidence provided by the expert witnesses for both sides indicated that this was a bad outcome; and Wolter's expert specifically said that the outcome could occur without negligence, trigger ing the need for the instruction. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Kellygreen2 sentences1993The California Supreme Court described this distinction and the rationale for affording it different legal consequences in People v. Kelly, 10 Cal.3d 565 , 111 Cal.Rptr. 171, 178 , 516 P.2d 875, 882 (1973), stating that in the former situation the "mental impairment does not extend beyond the period of intoxication," but in the latter, when long-term intoxication results in insanity, the mental disorder remains even after the effects of the drug or alcohol have worn off. 1993The California Supreme Court described this distinction and the rationale for affording it different legal consequences in People v. Kelly, 10 Cal.3d 565 , 111 Cal.Rptr. 171, 178 , 516 P.2d 875, 882 (1973), stating that in the former situation the "mental impairment does not extend beyond the period of intoxication," but in the latter, when long-term intoxication results in insanity, the mental disorder remains even after the effects of the drug or alcohol have worn off. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Degreat
green
2 sentences2022Id. at ¶ 21, 428 P.3d at 545 . ¶23 Because a defendant must only present "some credible evidence" in support of the proffered defense, the burden is rather low. 2022As this court has previously stated, "a defendant may satisfy this burden even if the only supporting evidence is 'highly improbable' testimony from the defendant . . . ." Id. at ¶ 22, 428 P.3d at 545 (quoting Lybarger v. People , 807 P.2d 570, 579 (Colo. 1991)). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Huckleberry
green
1 sentence2015The Huckleberry instruction informed the jurors that they had to acquit if they had a reasonable doubt that the defendant was present at the erime, and that it was not the defendant's burden to prove the alibi 8 The supreme court held that the defendant was not entitled to the instruction because, unlike an affirmative defense, an alibi defense merely "emphasizes the significance of particular issues of fact the People must establish in every criminal case," namely, that the defendant was present at and responsible for the crime. 768 P.2d at 1239 . 57 The same is true of an alternate suspect d | 1 | 2015–2015 |
People v. Garcia
green
1 sentence2000People v. Garcia, supra. The record here indicates that there was evidence from which a jury could conclude that defendant was guilty of eriminally negligent homicide. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Lowery v. Ford Hill Investment Co.
green
2 sentences1994Lowery v. Ford Hill Investment Co., 192 Colo. 125 , 556 P.2d 1201 (1976). 1994Lowery v. Ford Hill Investment Co., 192 Colo. 125 , 556 P.2d 1201 (1976). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
John A. Gearhart v. United States
green
1 sentence1975United States v. Webster, 468 F.2d 769 (9th Cir. 1972); Gearhart v. *125 United States, 272 F.2d 499 (D.C. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
United States v. Jack Lee Webster
green
1 sentence1975United States v. Webster, 468 F.2d 769 (9th Cir. 1972); Gearhart v. *125 United States, 272 F.2d 499 (D.C. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Atencio v. Torres
green
2 sentences1970Atencio v. Torres, 153 Colo. 507 , 385 P.2d 659 . 1970Atencio v. Torres, 153 Colo. 507 , 385 P.2d 659 . | 1 | 1970–1970 |
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.