Every person convicted of an offense under the statutes of this state has the right of appeal to review the proceedings resulting in conviction. The procedures to be followed in any such appeal shall be as provided by applicable rule of the supreme court of Colorado.
Source: L. 72: R&RE, p. 253, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 39-12-101.
16-12-101.5. Review of proceedings regarding class 1 felony convictions - legislative intent. (1) The general assembly urges the Colorado supreme court to adopt an expedited process to review class 1 felony convictions where the death penalty has been imposed and any order by the district court granting or denying postconviction relief in such cases. It is the general assembly's intent that the Colorado supreme court give priority to cases in which a sentence of death has been imposed over other cases before the court, except to the extent of any conflict with the requirement that the court give the highest priority to enforcement actions brought in accordance with section 20 (1) of article X of the state constitution.
(2) In any direct appeal of any class 1 felony case in which a conviction is entered and in which a sentence of death is imposed prior to the date upon which the Colorado supreme court adopts rules implementing the unitary system of review established by part 2 of this article, all challenges to any such conviction or sentence, with the exception of any newly discovered evidence or any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, shall be included in the brief of the person challenging such conviction or sentence, as such brief is defined by rule 28 of the Colorado appellate rules, at the time such brief is filed with the supreme court of the state of Colorado. Any issue which is not raised in the manner prescribed in this section shall be deemed to be irrevocably waived by the person challenging such conviction or sentence. The failure of such person to file a brief within any time limits ordered by the supreme court of the state of Colorado shall constitute an irrevocable waiver of all issues which could have been raised in such brief.
Source: L. 91: Entire section added, p. 430, § 7, effective May 24. L. 94: Entire section amended, p. 1473, § 1, effective July 1. L. 97: (2) amended, p. 1582, § 4, effective June 4.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
31
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case:
Wend v. People, 235 P.3d 1089 (Colo. 2010).
Wend v. People, 235 P.3d 1089 (Colo. 2010).
· cites it 12× “Finally, our shift towards a categorical prohibition against prosecutorial use of the word "lie" postdates Wend's initial appeal, so the change in our constitutional jurisprudence justifies this later appeal.”
Bovard v. People, 99 P.3d 585 (Colo. 2004).
· cites it 21× “Accordingly, Judge Taubman urged that *588 section 16-12-101, C.R.S. (2004), granting the defendant a right of appeal to review the proceedings resulting in his conviction, authorizes a direct appeal from the district court judgment entered from the de novo trial to the court of…”
People v. Baker, 104 P.3d 893 (Colo. 2005).
· cites it 4× “2d 595 (1969); see also § 16-12-101, C.R.S. (2004) ("Every person convicted of an offense under the statutes of this state has the right of appeal to review the proceedings resulting in conviction.”
People v. Bovard, 87 P.3d 215 (Colo. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 16× “After a trial, the district court jury found defendant guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol.”
People v. Johnson, 2015 CO 70 (Colo. 2015).
· cites it 2× “2010); see also § 16-12-101, C.R.S. (2015) (granting conviet-ed persons the statutory right to appeal the proceedings resulting in conviction).”
People v. Nelson, 2015 CO 68 (Colo. 2015).
· cites it 4× “684, 687 (1894), when the legislature creates one, as Colorado has done, see § 16-12-101, C.R.S. (2015), a criminal defendant is entitled to due process throughout the appeal.”
People v. Rivera-Bottzeck, 119 P.3d 546 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 3× “Section 16-12-101, C.R.S.2004. Although the right to appeal is not constitutionally required, once the state affords an individual this right, the procedures afforded by the state must comport with due process.”
People v. Hampton, 876 P.2d 1236 (Colo. 1994).
“§ 16-12-101, 8A C.R.S. (1986). As the court of appeals noted, if a defendant were required to file a motion for postconviction relief within three years of his conviction without taking into account the appeal period, then he might have to choose between the right to appeal and…”
Paul v. People, 105 P.3d 628 (Colo. 2005).
· cites it 2× “Criminal defendants in Colorado are expressly provided a statutory right of appeal from, among other things, any proceeding resulting in a conviction, see § 16-12-101, C.R.S. (2004); the imposition and propriety of a felony sentence, see § 18-1-409; the denial of a motion for…”
Hoang v. People, 323 P.3d 780 (Colo. 2014).
· cites it 2× “See § 16-12-101, C.R.S. (2018). Although no federal constitutional right to an appeal exists, when a state creates appellate courts as an integral part of the adjudication of guilt or innocence, appellate procedures must comport with the United States Constitution.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.