Cox claim (Colorado) · Go Syfert
← Colorado issues

Cox claim in Colorado

5 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2025 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.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
Krueger v. Arygreen
colo · 2009 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
2 sentences

2025See Cox, 735 P.2d at 155 (“If a person refuses to submit to such chemical test, then the jury may consider such refusal along with all other competent evidence in determining the Defendant’s guilt or innocence.”). ¶ 37 Fourth, even absent precedent supporting refusal instructions, the fact that we disfavor instructions highlighting specific evidence, Krueger, 205 P.3d at 1157 , did not make the court’s decision to give 16 the refusal instruction manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, or unfair, see McDonald, ¶ 54.

2025See Cox, 735 P.2d at 155 (“If a person refuses to submit to such chemical test, then the jury may consider such refusal along with all other competent evidence in determining the Defendant’s guilt or innocence.”). ¶ 37 Fourth, even absent precedent supporting refusal instructions, the fact that we disfavor instructions highlighting specific evidence, Krueger, 205 P.3d at 1157 , did not make the court’s decision to give 16 the refusal instruction manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, or unfair, see McDonald, ¶ 54.

11
Cox v. Peoplegreen
colo · 1987 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
2 sentences

2025See Cox, 735 P.2d at 155 (“If a person refuses to submit to such chemical test, then the jury may consider such refusal along with all other competent evidence in determining the Defendant’s guilt or innocence.”). ¶ 37 Fourth, even absent precedent supporting refusal instructions, the fact that we disfavor instructions highlighting specific evidence, Krueger, 205 P.3d at 1157 , did not make the court’s decision to give 16 the refusal instruction manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, or unfair, see McDonald, ¶ 54.

2025See Cox, 735 P.2d at 155 (“If a person refuses to submit to such chemical test, then the jury may consider such refusal along with all other competent evidence in determining the Defendant’s guilt or innocence.”). ¶ 37 Fourth, even absent precedent supporting refusal instructions, the fact that we disfavor instructions highlighting specific evidence, Krueger, 205 P.3d at 1157 , did not make the court’s decision to give 16 the refusal instruction manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, or unfair, see McDonald, ¶ 54.

11
People v. Arzabalagreen
coloctapp · 2012 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
2 sentences

2022See People v. Arzabala, 2012 COA 99, ¶ 13 (as the fact finder, it is the jury’s responsibility to weigh the evidence and resolve any conflicts or inconsistences).11 ¶ 44 Although Montoya admitted to drinking two beers earlier, he also claimed he was not drunk; the first officer who had contact with Montoya testified he did not notice an indicia of intoxication; there was no evidence of open liquor on Montoya (a shot of vodka 11Although we refer to defense counsel’s objections at the jury instruction conference to providing a so-called Cox instruction, Montoya did not raise on appeal a separate

2022See People v. Arzabala, 2012 COA 99, ¶ 13 (as the fact finder, it is the jury’s responsibility to weigh the evidence and resolve any conflicts or inconsistences).11 ¶ 44 Although Montoya admitted to drinking two beers earlier, he also claimed he was not drunk; the first officer who had contact with Montoya testified he did not notice an indicia of intoxication; there was no evidence of open liquor on Montoya (a shot of vodka 11Although we refer to defense counsel’s objections at the jury instruction conference to providing a so-called Cox instruction, Montoya did not raise on appeal a separate

11
United States v. Edwardsgreen
ca10 · 2001 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017See United States v. Edwards, 632 F.3d 633, 640 (10th Cir. 2001) (finding probable cause supported warrant-less arrest when, among other things, defendant “offered only implausible, inconsistent explanations of how he came into possession of money); United States v. Garcia, 179 F.3d 265, 269-70 (5th Cir. 1999) (finding probable cause existed when, among other things, “the defendants, responded to the agents’ questions with obviously false and inconsistent explanations”); People v. Omwanda, 2014 COA 128, ¶ 24 , 338 P.3d 1145, 1149 (finding probable cause existed when, among other things, defend

11
People v. Omwandagreen
coloctapp · 2014 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017See United States v. Edwards, 632 F.3d 633, 640 (10th Cir. 2001) (finding probable cause supported warrant-less arrest when, among other things, defendant “offered only implausible, inconsistent explanations of how he came into possession of money); United States v. Garcia, 179 F.3d 265, 269-70 (5th Cir. 1999) (finding probable cause existed when, among other things, “the defendants, responded to the agents’ questions with obviously false and inconsistent explanations”); People v. Omwanda, 2014 COA 128, ¶ 24 , 338 P.3d 1145, 1149 (finding probable cause existed when, among other things, defend

2017See United States v. Edwards, 632 F.3d 633, 640 (10th Cir. 2001) (finding probable cause supported warrant-less arrest when, among other things, defendant “offered only implausible, inconsistent explanations of how he came into possession of money); United States v. Garcia, 179 F.3d 265, 269-70 (5th Cir. 1999) (finding probable cause existed when, among other things, “the defendants, responded to the agents’ questions with obviously false and inconsistent explanations”); People v. Omwanda, 2014 COA 128, ¶ 24 , 338 P.3d 1145, 1149 (finding probable cause existed when, among other things, defend

11
United States v. Juan Felipe Garcia, United States of America v. Michael Angel Garciagreen
ca5 · 1999 · cited in 1 Colorado opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017See United States v. Edwards, 632 F.3d 633, 640 (10th Cir. 2001) (finding probable cause supported warrant-less arrest when, among other things, defendant “offered only implausible, inconsistent explanations of how he came into possession of money); United States v. Garcia, 179 F.3d 265, 269-70 (5th Cir. 1999) (finding probable cause existed when, among other things, “the defendants, responded to the agents’ questions with obviously false and inconsistent explanations”); People v. Omwanda, 2014 COA 128, ¶ 24 , 338 P.3d 1145, 1149 (finding probable cause existed when, among other things, defend

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Franks v. Delaware green
scotus · 1978
2 sentences

2018In contrast to the "good faith basis" showing we require to request a veracity hearing, under Franks , a veracity challenge may be made only if there is "a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included ... in the ... affidavit." Franks , 438 U.S. at 155 -56 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 . 6 Cox's motion to suppress suffers from the same deficiency and may have inadvertently led the trial court down the primrose path to error.

2018In contrast to the "good faith basis" showing we require to request a veracity hearing, under Franks , a veracity challenge may be made only if there is "a substantial preliminary showing that a false statement knowingly and intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, was included ... in the ... affidavit." Franks , 438 U.S. at 155 -56 , 98 S.Ct. 2674 . 6 Cox's motion to suppress suffers from the same deficiency and may have inadvertently led the trial court down the primrose path to error.

12018–2018
Troxell v. Trammell green
ky · 1987
2 sentences

1992The majority relies on Troxell v. Trammell, 730 S.W.2d 525 (Ky.1987), to support its position that Cox’s claim arises under the Act.

1992The majority relies on Troxell v. Trammell, 730 S.W.2d 525 (Ky.1987), to support its position that Cox's claim arises under the Act.

11992–1992

Where else courts name it

TX 18 (1996–2025) PA 14 (2005–2024) FL 10 (2002–2016) OH 8 (2009–2025) IN 7 (1980–2017) MS 7 (1996–2017) DE 7 (2016–2025) CA 7 (1985–2021) WA 6 (1991–2020) GA 6 (1982–2019) KY 5 (2012–2023) IL 5 (2008–2024) CO 5 (1992–2025) NY 4 (1959–2022) WI 3 (2020–2022) MO 3 (2015–2023) AR 3 (2006–2015) LA 3 (1974–2007) MD 3 (1987–2009) DC 2 (1998–2010) AZ 2 (1995–2019) MT 2 (1990–1994) MN 2 (1987–2019)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check