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.
7 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 2015–2026 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
Sibron v. New Yorkgreen2 sentences2025Id. (“Under the collateral consequences exception to the mootness 30 doctrine, a case is moot ‘only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction.’” (quoting Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40, 57 (1968))). ¶ 58 Drawing from these principles, the Castillos argue that their claims are not moot because a trial could visit additional adverse consequences on STEM. 2024“Under the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine, a case is moot ‘only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction.’” DePriest, ¶ 9, 487 P.3d at 662 (quoting Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40, 57 (1968)). | 5 | 5 |
v. Peoplegreen2 sentences2024“Under the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine, a case is moot ‘only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction.’” DePriest, ¶ 9, 487 P.3d at 662 (quoting Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40, 57 (1968)). 2024“Under the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine, a case is moot ‘only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction.’” DePriest, ¶ 9, 487 P.3d at 662 (quoting Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40, 57 (1968)). | 2 | 2 |
Ellis v. Brotherhood of Railway, Airline & Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express & Station Employesgreen2 sentences2021Clerks, Freight Handlers, Exp. & Station Emps., 466 U.S. 435, 442 (1984)). 10 ¶9 Under the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine, a case 11 is moot “only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal 12 consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction.” Sibron v. 13 New York, 392 U.S. 40, 57 (1968). 2021Clerks , Freight Handlers , Exp . & Station Emps . , 466 U.S. 435, 442 ( 1984 ) ) . ¶9 Under the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine, a case is moot "only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction." Sibron v. New York , 392 U.S. 40, 57 ( 1968 ) . | 1 | 2 |
People in the Interest of C.G., and Concerning J.Ngreen1 sentence2026See People in Interest of C.G., 2015 COA 106, ¶ 13 ; see also DePriest v. People, 2021 CO 40, ¶ 9 (“Under the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine, a case is moot ‘only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction.’” (citation omitted)). ¶8 Father asserts that the magistrate’s domestic violence finding “carries ongoing collateral consequences” and that it must be vacated. | 1 | 1 |
Petitioner: Wesley Richard DePriest v. Respondent: The People of the State of Colorado.green1 sentence2026See People in Interest of C.G., 2015 COA 106, ¶ 13 ; see also DePriest v. People, 2021 CO 40, ¶ 9 (“Under the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine, a case is moot ‘only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction.’” (citation omitted)). ¶8 Father asserts that the magistrate’s domestic violence finding “carries ongoing collateral consequences” and that it must be vacated. | 1 | 1 |
In Re AKgreen1 sentence2015Lethem v. Lethem , 193 P.3d 839, 849 (Haw. 2008) (concluding that an appeal fell within the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine when there was a “‘reasonable possibility’†that the order would cause harm to a party’s reputation); In re A.K. , 628 S.E.2d 753, 759 (N.C. 2006) (holding that appeal from a juvenile neglect adjudication was not moot as it could reasonably result in collateral legal consequences). | 1 | 1 |
Hamilton Ex Rel. Lethem v. Lethemgreen1 sentence2015Lethem v. Lethem , 193 P.3d 839, 849 (Haw. 2008) (concluding that an appeal fell within the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine when there was a “‘reasonable possibility’†that the order would cause harm to a party’s reputation); In re A.K. , 628 S.E.2d 753, 759 (N.C. 2006) (holding that appeal from a juvenile neglect adjudication was not moot as it could reasonably result in collateral legal consequences). | 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 ex rel. N.G.
green
1 sentence2015People in Interest of N.G. , 2012 COA 131 , ¶¶30-31. ¶45       Because we have concluded that the order is not moot for these reasons, we do not address father’s remaining contention that the court erred by failing to adopt a collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.