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.
6 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2025 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Kodama v. Johnsongreen2 sentences1995Kodama v. Johnson, 786 P.2d 417 (Colo.1990). 1995See Kodama v. Johnson, 786 P.2d 417 (Colo.1990). | 2 | 4 |
Mariani v. Colorado Department of Correctionsgreen1 sentence2025The due process rights applicable to a prison disciplinary hearing are (1) advance written notice of the charged violations of the disciplinary code; (2) a written statement by the hearing officer giving reasons for the hearing and the evidence relied upon; and (3) the right to call witnesses and present evidence “when doing so does not interfere with the security and order of the institution.” Mariani v. Colo. Dep’t of Corr., 956 P.2d 625, 628 (Colo. App. 1997). 6 B. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Villa v. Gunter
green
1 sentence2006Similarly, in Villa v. Gunter, 862 P.2d 1033 (Colo.App.1993), on review under C.R.C.P. 106(a)(4), a division of this court remanded for a new hearing where a factual question existed regarding whether an inmate in a prison disciplinary hearing was denied the opportunity to call a witness who had information relevant to his defense. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.