8 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Carrillo v. Peoplegreen2 sentences1999"When a trial court erroneously denies a challenge for cause to a prospective juror, the defendant uses a peremptory challenge to remove that juror, and the defendant exhausts all available peremptory challenges, the trial court's ruling `affects a substantial right of the defendant and cannot be deemed harmless error.' " See id., 974 P.2d at 486 -87 (quoting People v. Macrander, 828 P.2d 234, 244 (Colo.1992)). *76 B. 1999"When a trial court erroneously denies a challenge for cause to a prospective juror, the defendant uses a peremptory challenge to remove that juror, and the defendant exhausts all available peremptory challenges, the trial court's ruling `affects a substantial right of the defendant and cannot be deemed harmless error.' " See id., 974 P.2d at 486 -87 (quoting People v. Macrander, 828 P.2d 234, 244 (Colo.1992)). *76 B. | 1 | 4 |
United States v. Martinez-Salazargreen2 sentences2024But in so doing, the Court noted that the case before it did not involve any assertion that the trial court "deliberately misapplied the law in order to force the defendants to use a peremptory challenge to correct the court's error." Id. at 316 (citation omitted) (citing Ross , 487 U.S. at 91 n.5). 21 ¶41 Novotny thus contemplated two ways an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge might rise to the level of structural error: (1) where the error resulted in a Sixth Amendment violation because the biased juror actually served on the jury, and (2) where the error involved a deliberate misappl 2024But in so doing, the Court noted that the case before it did not involve any assertion that the trial court "deliberately misapplied the law in order to force the defendants to use a peremptory challenge to correct the court's error." Id. at 316 (citation omitted) (citing Ross , 487 U.S. at 91 n.5). 21 ¶41 Novotny thus contemplated two ways an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge might rise to the level of structural error: (1) where the error resulted in a Sixth Amendment violation because the biased juror actually served on the jury, and (2) where the error involved a deliberate misappl | 1 | 2 |
People v. MacRanderred2 sentences1999"When a trial court erroneously denies a challenge for cause to a prospective juror, the defendant uses a peremptory challenge to remove that juror, and the defendant exhausts all available peremptory challenges, the trial court's ruling `affects a substantial right of the defendant and cannot be deemed harmless error.' " See id., 974 P.2d at 486 -87 (quoting People v. Macrander, 828 P.2d 234, 244 (Colo.1992)). *76 B. 1999When a trial court erroneously denies a challenge for cause to a prospective juror, the defendant uses a peremptory challenge to remove that juror, and the defendant exhausts all available peremptory challenges, the trial court’s ruling “affects a substantial right of the defendant and cannot be deemed harmless error.” See Macrander, 828 P.2d at 244 . | 1 | 2 |
Reginald Keith Clark v. The People of the State of Colorado.green1 sentence2026See Clark v. People, 2024 CO 55 , ¶ 42 (“[W]hen a defendant uses a peremptory challenge to correct a trial court’s erroneous denial of a challenge for cause, ‘so long as the defendant receives both an impartial jury and the number of peremptory challenges specified by state statute, the defendant’s constitutional rights remain unaffected.’ Absent bad faith, any such error that does not result in the biased juror actually participating on the jury is necessarily harmless.” (citations omitted)). 29 | 1 | 1 |
People v. Novotnygreen2 sentences2024But in so doing, the Court noted that the case before it did not involve any assertion that the trial court "deliberately misapplied the law in order to force the defendants to use a peremptory challenge to correct the court's error." Id. at 316 (citation omitted) (citing Ross , 487 U.S. at 91 n.5). 21 ¶41 Novotny thus contemplated two ways an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge might rise to the level of structural error: (1) where the error resulted in a Sixth Amendment violation because the biased juror actually served on the jury, and (2) where the error involved a deliberate misappl 2024But in so doing, the Court noted that the case before it did not involve any assertion that the trial court "deliberately misapplied the law in order to force the defendants to use a peremptory challenge to correct the court's error." Id. at 316 (citation omitted) (citing Ross , 487 U.S. at 91 n.5). 21 ¶41 Novotny thus contemplated two ways an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge might rise to the level of structural error: (1) where the error resulted in a Sixth Amendment violation because the biased juror actually served on the jury, and (2) where the error involved a deliberate misappl | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ross v. Oklahoma
green
2 sentences2024But in so doing, the Court noted that the case before it did not involve any assertion that the trial court "deliberately misapplied the law in order to force the defendants to use a peremptory challenge to correct the court's error." Id. at 316 (citation omitted) (citing Ross , 487 U.S. at 91 n.5). 21 ¶41 Novotny thus contemplated two ways an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge might rise to the level of structural error: (1) where the error resulted in a Sixth Amendment violation because the biased juror actually served on the jury, and (2) where the error involved a deliberate misappl 2024But in so doing, the Court noted that the case before it did not involve any assertion that the trial court "deliberately misapplied the law in order to force the defendants to use a peremptory challenge to correct the court's error." Id. at 316 (citation omitted) (citing Ross , 487 U.S. at 91 n.5). 21 ¶41 Novotny thus contemplated two ways an erroneous denial of a for-cause challenge might rise to the level of structural error: (1) where the error resulted in a Sixth Amendment violation because the biased juror actually served on the jury, and (2) where the error involved a deliberate misappl | 1 | 2024–2024 |
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.