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.
8 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Pernell v. Peoplegreen2 sentences2025The relevant inquiry is “whether, viewed in the aggregate, the errors deprived the defendant of a fair trial.” Id. at ¶ 40, 443 P.3d at 1014 ; see Vigil, ¶ 48, 557 P.3d at 815 (explaining that, to determine whether errors are harmless individually or collectively, we must conduct a “case specific assessment of the likely impact of the error[s] in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole” (quoting Pernell v. People, 2018 CO 13, ¶ 22 , 411 P.3d 669, 673 )). ¶ 77 As discussed above, the court made two, and possibly three, errors — it may have erred by excluding evidence of Cholo’s que 2025The relevant inquiry is “whether, viewed in the aggregate, the errors deprived the defendant of a fair trial.” Id. at ¶ 40, 443 P.3d at 1014 ; see Vigil, ¶ 48, 557 P.3d at 815 (explaining that, to determine whether errors are harmless individually or collectively, we must conduct a “case specific assessment of the likely impact of the error[s] in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole” (quoting Pernell v. People, 2018 CO 13, ¶ 22 , 411 P.3d 669, 673 )). ¶ 77 As discussed above, the court made two, and possibly three, errors — it may have erred by excluding evidence of Cholo’s que | 2 | 2 |
People v. Novotnygreen2 sentences2017It is now established that the determination whether a trial error has affected a substantial right of a defendant can only result from a ease specific assessment of the likely impact of the error in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole, People v. Novotny, 2014 CO 18, ¶¶ 14-27 , 320 P.3d 1194, 1199-1203 , and that an objected-to trial error cannot be classified as harmless if there is a reasonable probability that it contributed to the defendant’s conviction, Roman, ¶ 13; Crider v. People, 186 P.3d 39, 42-43 (Colo. 2008). ¶23 Although a determination whether there is .a reasona 2017It is now established that the determination whether a trial error has affected a substantial right of a defendant can only result from a ease specific assessment of the likely impact of the error in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole, People v. Novotny, 2014 CO 18, ¶¶ 14-27 , 320 P.3d 1194, 1199-1203 , and that an objected-to trial error cannot be classified as harmless if there is a reasonable probability that it contributed to the defendant’s conviction, Roman, ¶ 13; Crider v. People, 186 P.3d 39, 42-43 (Colo. 2008). ¶23 Although a determination whether there is .a reasona | 1 | 3 |
People v. Mendenhallgreen1 sentence2025But given the nature of the two errors and the possible third error, coupled with the overwhelming evidence of Cholo’s guilt, “we cannot conclude that the cumulative effect of the errors substantially prejudiced [his] right to a fair trial.” People v. Mendenhall, 2015 COA 107M, ¶ 82 , 363 P.3d 758, 775 (holding that the cumulative effect of the trial court’s admission of irrelevant testimony and the prosecutor’s improper statements did not substantially prejudice the defendant’s right to a fair trial). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Gaffneygreen1 sentence2018A reviewing court's "determination [of] whether a trial error has affected a substantial right of a defendant can only result from a case specific assessment of the likely impact of the error in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole," People v. Rock , 2017 CO 84 , ¶ 22, 402 P.3d 472 , 479, and an objected-to trial error is harmless if there is no reasonable possibility that it contributed to the defendant's conviction, People v. Roman , 2017 CO 70 , ¶ 13, 398 P.3d 134 , 138 ; see also People v. Gaffney , 769 P.2d 1081 , 1088 (Colo. 1989) (an error may be deemed harmless "[i]f a | 1 | 1 |
Crider v. Peoplegreen2 sentences2017It is now established that the determination whether a trial error has affected a substantial right of a defendant can only result from a ease specific assessment of the likely impact of the error in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole, People v. Novotny, 2014 CO 18, ¶¶ 14-27 , 320 P.3d 1194, 1199-1203 , and that an objected-to trial error cannot be classified as harmless if there is a reasonable probability that it contributed to the defendant’s conviction, Roman, ¶ 13; Crider v. People, 186 P.3d 39, 42-43 (Colo. 2008). ¶23 Although a determination whether there is .a reasona 2017Roman, ¶ 14 (citing Crider, 186 P.3d at 43 ). | 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. Rock
green
2 sentences2020This determination necessarily results from “a case specific assessment of the likely impact of the error in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole.” Id. (quoting People v. Rock, 2017 CO 84, ¶ 22 ). 2018A reviewing court's "determination [of] whether a trial error has affected a substantial right of a defendant can only result from a case specific assessment of the likely impact of the error in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole," People v. Rock , 2017 CO 84 , ¶ 22, 402 P.3d 472 , 479, and an objected-to trial error is harmless if there is no reasonable possibility that it contributed to the defendant's conviction, People v. Roman , 2017 CO 70 , ¶ 13, 398 P.3d 134 , 138 ; see also People v. Gaffney , 769 P.2d 1081 , 1088 (Colo. 1989) (an error may be deemed harmless "[i]f a | 2 | 2018–2020 |
Howard-Walker v. People
green
1 sentence2025The relevant inquiry is “whether, viewed in the aggregate, the errors deprived the defendant of a fair trial.” Id. at ¶ 40, 443 P.3d at 1014 ; see Vigil, ¶ 48, 557 P.3d at 815 (explaining that, to determine whether errors are harmless individually or collectively, we must conduct a “case specific assessment of the likely impact of the error[s] in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole” (quoting Pernell v. People, 2018 CO 13, ¶ 22 , 411 P.3d 669, 673 )). ¶ 77 As discussed above, the court made two, and possibly three, errors — it may have erred by excluding evidence of Cholo’s que | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Nicholls v. People
green
1 sentence2020This determination necessarily results from “a case specific assessment of the likely impact of the error in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole.” Id. (quoting People v. Rock, 2017 CO 84, ¶ 22 ). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Roman
green
2 sentences2018A reviewing court's "determination [of] whether a trial error has affected a substantial right of a defendant can only result from a case specific assessment of the likely impact of the error in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole," People v. Rock , 2017 CO 84 , ¶ 22, 402 P.3d 472 , 479, and an objected-to trial error is harmless if there is no reasonable possibility that it contributed to the defendant's conviction, People v. Roman , 2017 CO 70 , ¶ 13, 398 P.3d 134 , 138 ; see also People v. Gaffney , 769 P.2d 1081 , 1088 (Colo. 1989) (an error may be deemed harmless "[i]f a 2018A reviewing court's "determination [of] whether a trial error has affected a substantial right of a defendant can only result from a case specific assessment of the likely impact of the error in question on the outcome of the litigation as a whole," People v. Rock , 2017 CO 84 , ¶ 22, 402 P.3d 472 , 479, and an objected-to trial error is harmless if there is no reasonable possibility that it contributed to the defendant's conviction, People v. Roman , 2017 CO 70 , ¶ 13, 398 P.3d 134 , 138 ; see also People v. Gaffney , 769 P.2d 1081 , 1088 (Colo. 1989) (an error may be deemed harmless "[i]f a | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Krutsinger v. People
green
1 sentence2018See, e.g. , Novotny , ¶¶ 19-20, 320 P.3d at 1200-01 ; Hagos v. People , 2012 CO 63 , ¶ 12, 288 P.3d 116 , 119 ; Krutsinger v. People , 219 P.3d 1054 , 1058 (Colo. 2009). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Hagos v. People
green
2 sentences2018See, e.g. , Novotny , ¶¶ 19-20, 320 P.3d at 1200-01 ; Hagos v. People , 2012 CO 63 , ¶ 12, 288 P.3d 116 , 119 ; Krutsinger v. People , 219 P.3d 1054 , 1058 (Colo. 2009). 2018See, e.g. , Novotny , ¶¶ 19-20, 320 P.3d at 1200-01 ; Hagos v. People , 2012 CO 63 , ¶ 12, 288 P.3d 116 , 119 ; Krutsinger v. People , 219 P.3d 1054 , 1058 (Colo. 2009). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
People v. Johnson
green
2 sentences1989The mere unwillingness of an otherwise available child is insufficient to render the child “medically unavailable.” See People v. Johnson, 118 Ill.2d 501 , 115 Ill.Dec. 384 , 517 N.E.2d 1070 (1987). 1989The mere unwillingness of an otherwise available child is insufficient to render the child “medically unavailable.” See People v. Johnson, 118 Ill.2d 501 , 115 Ill.Dec. 384 , 517 N.E.2d 1070 (1987). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
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.