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 1966–2024 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Moore-Elgreen2 sentences2024See People v. Ca stillo , 2022 COA 20 , ¶ 38; accord People v. Moore- El , 160 P.3d 393, 395 (Colo. App. 2007) ; see also Crim P. 35(c)(2)(I) (A defendant may challenge, among other things, a “sentence imposed in violation of the Constitution. ”). ¶ 9 Rule 35(c) claims are subject to procedural bars: (1) absent justifiable excuse or excusable neglect, postconviction challeng es to non-class 1 felonies must be brought within three years of the conviction becoming final, see § 16 -5-402(1), (2)(d), C.R.S. 2023; and (2) subject to certain exceptions, the court “shall deny any claim ” that is succ 2024See People v. Ca stillo , 2022 COA 20 , ¶ 38; accord People v. Moore- El , 160 P.3d 393, 395 (Colo. App. 2007) ; see also Crim P. 35(c)(2)(I) (A defendant may challenge, among other things, a “sentence imposed in violation of the Constitution. ”). ¶ 9 Rule 35(c) claims are subject to procedural bars: (1) absent justifiable excuse or excusable neglect, postconviction challeng es to non-class 1 felonies must be brought within three years of the conviction becoming final, see § 16 -5-402(1), (2)(d), C.R.S. 2023; and (2) subject to certain exceptions, the court “shall deny any claim ” that is succ | 2 | 2 |
Gold Star Sausage Co. v. Kempfgreen1 sentence2022See Walker Com., Inc. v. Brown , 2021 COA 60 , ¶¶ 26–27 , 492 P.3d 1045 , 1051 ( citing Gold Star Sausage Co. v. Kempf , 653 P.2d 397 , 400–01 ( Colo. 1982 ) ) . | 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. Walker
green
2 sentences1997However, the court did not recognize the inherently suggestive nature of the identification procedure which was, in essence, a one-on-one confrontation, see People v. Walker, supra , and did not address the other Walker factors relevant to reliability discussed above. 1997However, the court did not recognize the inherently suggestive nature of the identification procedure which was, in essence, a one-on-one confrontation, see People v. Walker, supra , and did not address the other Walker factors relevant to reliability discussed above. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
In re the Title, Ballot Title, Submission Clause, & Summary, Adopted April 4th, 1990, Pertaining to the Proposed Initiative on Surface Mining
green
1 sentence1993At the hearing following" the motion for rehearing, the “catch phrase” issue was not argued by the petitioner, although it was mentioned by one member of the Board, who simply referred to this court’s decision in In re Proposed Initiative on Surface Mining, 797 P.2d 1275 (Colo.1990). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Roberts v. People
green
2 sentences1966From a procedural standpoint, .the Attorney General states that the instant case is governed by Roberts v. People, 158 Colo. 76 , 404 P.2d 848 , which incidentally was decided subsequent to the time the matter was before the trial court. 1966From a procedural standpoint, .the Attorney General states that the instant case is governed by Roberts v. People, 158 Colo. 76 , 404 P.2d 848 , which incidentally was decided subsequent to the time the matter was before the trial court. | 1 | 1966–1966 |
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.