extended analysis in Colorado

2025And the court extended that principle, holding that “the defense may not ask a defense witness questions which it knows the witness will refuse to answer because of a valid claim to a privilege not to testify.” Id. ¶ 18 It’s true that during the pendency of this appeal, the supreme court decided Rios-Vargas, which held that a defendant is entitled to question a nonparty alternate suspect who intends to invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege and that such a witness cannot assert a blanket privilege under the Fifth Amendment.

2019The upshot is that unlike a case where the defendant claims his counsel provided ineffective assistance during the appeal, for which the defendant must show that he would have prevailed on appeal but for the deficient performance, Robbins, 528 U.S. at 285 (unreasonable failure to file a merits brief on appeal required showing of actual prejudice); Long, 126 P.3d at 286 , in the circumstance where counsel fails to appeal in contravention of a defendant’s wishes, no such showing is required. ¶ 29 In Valdez, a division of this court extended this principle to a case in which postconviction counse

2019P. 35(c) as requested by the defendant, resulting in the postconviction court deeming the motion barred by the doctrine of laches. 178 P.3d at 1273-75 .

2002Wilson, 519 U.S. at 410 , 117 S.Ct. 882 .

2002Wilson, 519 U.S. at 410 , 117 S.Ct. 882 .

2002In Wilson, the Court extended the rule of Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 , 98 S.Ct. 330 , 54 L.Ed.2d 331 (1977) to passengers, thus permitting officers to order passengers of a vehicle stopped for a traffic violation out of the car pending completion of the stop.

2002In Wilson, the Court extended the rule of Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 , 98 S.Ct. 330 , 54 L.Ed.2d 331 (1977) to passengers, thus permitting officers to order passengers of a vehicle stopped for a traffic violation out of the car pending completion of the stop.

1996In People v. Cerrone, supra (fn.22), our supreme court stated that, when the prosecutor is permitted to present evidence in support of a race-neutral explanation, “the defendant must be given an opportunity to challenge the credibility of whatever evidence the [prosecutor] present[s].” In People v. Mendoza, supra, a division of this court extended this requirement to all Batson challenges in which the prosecutor attempts to tender a race-neutral justification.

1996In People v. Cerrone, supra (fn.22), our supreme court stated that, when the prosecutor is permitted to present evidence in support of a race-neutral explanation, “the defendant must be given an opportunity to challenge the credibility of whatever evidence the [prosecutor] present[s].” In People v. Mendoza, supra, a division of this court extended this requirement to all Batson challenges in which the prosecutor attempts to tender a race-neutral justification.

1992Alvarez, 797 P.2d at 41 .

1991Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724 , 94 S.Ct. 1274 , 39 L.Ed.2d 714 (1974), subsequently approved in Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189 , 107 S.Ct. 533 , 93 L.Ed.2d 499 (1986), is disposi-tive.

1991Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724 , 94 S.Ct. 1274 , 39 L.Ed.2d 714 (1974), subsequently approved in Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189 , 107 S.Ct. 533 , 93 L.Ed.2d 499 (1986), is disposi-tive.

1991Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724 , 94 S.Ct. 1274 , 39 L.Ed.2d 714 (1974), subsequently approved in Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189 , 107 S.Ct. 533 , 93 L.Ed.2d 499 (1986), is disposi-tive.

1991Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724 , 94 S.Ct. 1274 , 39 L.Ed.2d 714 (1974), subsequently approved in Munro v. Socialist Workers Party, 479 U.S. 189 , 107 S.Ct. 533 , 93 L.Ed.2d 499 (1986), is disposi-tive.

1990Id.; Drake, 785 P.2d at 1275 ; Hernandez, 686 P.2d at 1329 . *41 Except in rare cases, trial and appellate courts may review the constitutionality of sentences under the eighth amendment by engaging in less than “an extended analysis.” Solem, 463 U.S. at 290 n. 16, 103 S.Ct. at 3009 n. 16.

1990Id.; Drake, 785 P.2d at 1275 ; Hernandez, 686 P.2d at 1329 . *41 Except in rare cases, trial and appellate courts may review the constitutionality of sentences under the eighth amendment by engaging in less than “an extended analysis.” Solem, 463 U.S. at 290 n. 16, 103 S.Ct. at 3009 n. 16.

1990Id.; Drake, 785 P.2d at 1275 ; Hernandez, 686 P.2d at 1329 . *41 Except in rare cases, trial and appellate courts may review the constitutionality of sentences under the eighth amendment by engaging in less than “an extended analysis.” Solem, 463 U.S. at 290 n. 16, 103 S.Ct. at 3009 n. 16.

1990In Hernandez, 686 P.2d at 1330 , and Drake, 785 P.2d at 1275, we undertook proportionality reviews which were less extensive than the complete analysis suggested by the Solem Court.

1956It was further found that Cobb, being an agent of the City and County of Denver, enjoyed the same immunity from the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission as that enjoyed by the City and County of Denver, and relied upon the decision of this court in the case of Englewood v. Denver, 123 Colo. 290 , 229 P. (2d) 667 , and determined that it had no jurisdiction of the matter and entered an order dismissing the complaint.

1956It was further found that Cobb, being an agent of the City and County of Denver, enjoyed the same immunity from the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission as that enjoyed by the City and County of Denver, and relied upon the decision of this court in the case of Englewood v. Denver, 123 Colo. 290 , 229 P. (2d) 667 , and determined that it had no jurisdiction of the matter and entered an order dismissing the complaint.