People v. Vidauri, 2021 CO 24 (Colo. Apr. 19, 2021) (the prosecution does not have to prove that a defendant received public benefits to which she was not entitled to be convicted of theft by deception)


People v. Thompson, 2021 CO 15 (Colo. Feb. 22, 2021) (prosecution did not present sufficient evidence to establish the applicability of the independent source doctrine)


Perez v. People, 479 P.3d 430 (Colo. 2021) (the public safety exception to the Miranda rule applied when officer found two live shotgun shells in defendant's pocket and, without giving Miranda warnings, officer asked defendant “where the gun was.”)


People in Interest of B.D., 477 P.3d 143 (Colo. 2020) (at-risk victim statute, imposing greater penalties when a theft happens in presence of an at-risk victim, is a sentence enhancer rather than an element of offense) 


People in Interest of A.A. and E.A., 479 P.3d 57 (Colo. App. 2020) (reversing parental termination order because the human services department did not exercise reasonable efforts to reunite the family)


People v. Mentzer, 2020 COA 91 (Colo. App. Jun. 11, 2020) (the trial judge, a former prosecutor, should have recused herself from this case because she had served in a supervisory capacity over the attorneys who investigated or prosecuted this case at the time they filed the charges against the defendant)


People in Interest of J.D., 464 P.3d 785 (Colo. 2020) (magistrate who accepted juvenile's guilty plea in juvenile delinquency proceeding retained jurisdiction to hear juvenile's motion to withdraw plea based on ineffective assistance of plea counsel)


Yeadon v. People, 462 P.3d 1087 (Colo. 2020) (defendant is entitled to be present and request waiver when court corrects sentence to include drug offender surcharge)


People v. Cali, 459 P.3d 516 (Colo. 2020) (a defendant is not entitled to the benefit of a statutory amendment when the defendant does not seek relief based on that amendatory legislation until after his or her conviction becomes final)


People v. Pratarelli, 471 P.3d 1177(Colo. App. 2020) (evidence was insufficient to establish first degree kidnapping because prosecution failed to establish that defendant forcibly seized his daughter)


M.A.W. v. People, 456 P.3d 1284 (Colo. 2020) (the test for prejudice in the context of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in a dependency and neglect proceeding is the test for prejudice set forth in Strickland v. Washington)


People v. Dyer, 457 P.3d 783 (Colo. App. 2019) (conviction for first-degree child abuse reversed because Department of Human Services caseworkers are subject to the Fourth Amendment and therefore the caseworkers’ warrantless entry in this case was illegal and required suppression of all evidence obtained as a direct result of that illegal entry)


People v. Vidauri, 2019 COA 140 (Colo. App. Sep. 5, 2019) (there was insufficient evidence of felony theft because the prosecution only presented evidence showing the amount of benefits paid to the defendant and failed to prove the value of the benefits obtained by deceit)


People in Interest of T.M.S., 454 P.3d 375 (Colo. App. 2019) (juvenile court erred in dependency and neglect proceeding by allowing parent’s guardian ad litem to present argument and testimony against parent’s interest and over parent’s objection)


People v. Yakas, 461 P.3d 568 (Colo. App. 2019) (the statutory right to a speedy disposition guaranteed by the Uniform Mandatory Disposition of Detainers Act, and the required statutory advisement of rights, may be waived by counsel)


Campbell v. People, 443 P.3d 72 (Colo. 2019) (police officer’s testimony regarding horizontal gaze nystagmus field sobriety test was unqualified expert testimony, not lay testimony)


People v. Chavez-Torres, 442 P.3d 843 (Colo. 2019) (non-citizen defendant was entitled to evidentiary hearing to determine applicability of time bar on postconviction review due to justifiable excuse or excusable neglect)


People v. Alvarado Hinojos, 444 P.3d 755 (Colo. 2019) (when the plea agreement or the plea hearing transcript is submitted with a petition for postconviction relief, the trial court should consider it in conjunction with the allegations advanced)


People in Interest of J.V.D., 442 P.3d 1030 (Colo. App. 2019) (because the juvenile court did not fulfill its constitutional or statutory duties to secure an effective waiver, the juvenile’s right to counsel was violated)


People in Interest of B.D., 479 P.3d 21 (Colo. App. 2019) (for court to impose enhanced sentence, prosecution was required to prove that juvenile was aware that the victim was an at-risk person or that an element or portion of the crime would be committed in the at-risk person’s presence)


Ray v. People, 440 P.3d 412 (Colo. 2019) (the trial court must exercise its discretion in allowing testimonial exhibits into the jury room, with the ultimate objective of assessing whether using the exhibit will aid the jury in its proper consideration of the case, and even if so, whether a party will nevertheless be unfairly prejudiced by the jury’s use of it)


United States v. Medina, 918 F.3d 774 (10th Cir. 2019) (waiting for another sovereign to complete its prosecution does not justify every delay in post-indictment proceedings, and the mere fact that the defendant was incarcerated on a previous charge for a portion of the delay does not by itself excuse the delay)


People v. Terry, 2019 COA 9 (Colo. App. Jan. 24, 2019) (under Crim. P. 35(c)(3)(V), the district court may rule on a supplemental petition for postconviction relief, in part, and order the prosecutor to respond and defense counsel to reply to the remaining allegation)


People v. Salgado, 444 P.3d 829 (Colo. App. 2019) (an executive

order issued thirty years ago provides continuing authorization for

the attorney general to prosecute medicaid fraud and patient abuse

cases across the state)


People v. Senette, 436 P.3d 561 (Colo. App. 2018) (a trial court abuses its discretion if its ruling on a motion for a continuance is manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, or unfair, or is based on an erroneous understanding or application of the law)


People v. Laeke, 431 P.3d 667 (Colo. App. 2018) (Crim. P. 32(d) does not apply to motions to withdraw pleas of not guilty by reason of insanity)


People v. Sandoval, 413 P.3d 1274 (Colo. 2018) (an aggravated direct sentence to community corrections must rely on facts that are either Blakely-compliant or Blakely-exempt)


People in the Interest of J.C., 428 P.3d 617 (Colo. App. 2018) (a court may not sentence a juvenile to commitment with the Division of Youth Corrections for an indeterminate term)


People in the Interest of L.K., 407 P.3d 566 (Colo. 2017) (sovereign immunity does not bar an award of attorney fees against a public entity)


Isom v. People, 407 P.3d 559 (Colo. 2017) (to calculate the maximum permissible minimum end of an indeterminate sentence for a defendant sentenced as a habitual sex offender against children, trial courts must triple the maximum of the presumptive range for the offense and may then double the resulting figure if the court finds extraordinary aggravating circumstances)


People in the Interest of J.D., 468 P.3d 35 (Colo. App. 2017) (in juvenile delinquency case, magistrate has jurisdiction to consider a motion to withdraw a previously entered guilty plea based on ineffective assistance of counsel)


People in the Interest of J.W., 406 P.3d 853 (Colo. 2017) (juvenile court’s failure to enter adjudicative order confirming the children’s status did not divest the court of jurisdiction to terminate the mother’s parental rights)


Espino-Paez v. People, 395 P.3d 786 (Colo. 2017) (a defendant who has successfully completed the terms of his deferred judgment is not entitled to withdraw his guilty plea to the deferred judgment under Crim. P. 32(d))


Flores-Heredia v. People, 395 P.3d 800 (Colo. 2017) (a defendant’s guilty plea is withdrawn and the charge is dismissed by operation of law on successful completion of a deferred judgment)


Estrada-Huerta v. People, 394 P.3d 1139 (Colo. 2017) (the categorical ban on sentences of life without parole for juveniles who were not convicted of homicide does not apply to an aggregate term-of-years sentence)


People v. Chavez-Torres, 410 P.3d 690 (Colo. App. 2016) (defendant had no reason to question the constitutionality of his conviction until he became aware of his attorney’s failure to fulfill her legal duty to advise him of the immigration consequences of the plea)


People v. Sosa, 395 P.3d 1144 (Colo. App. 2016) (in a criminal case, there is no final judgment, for appeal purposes, until the defendant is acquitted, the charges are dismissed, or the defendant is convicted and sentence is imposed) (withdrawn)


People v. Penn, 379 P.3d 298 (Colo. 2016) (where a petition for rehearing is timely filed in the district court, the district court judgment does not become final for purposes of the forty-two-day period to file a petition for writ of certiorari under C.A.R. 52(a) until the district court denies the petition for rehearing)


People v. Villanueva, 374 P.3d 535 (Colo. App. 2016) (a defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel based on a conflict of interest need not show that the defense would necessarily have been successful had the alternative strategy or tactic been used)


People v. Graves, 368 P.3d 317 (Colo. 2016) (Colorado's public indecency statute, section 18-7-301(1)(d), is not unconstitutionally overbroad or vague)


People v. Sandoval, 2016 COA 19 (Colo. App. Feb. 11, 2016) (a court cannot aggravate a defendant's direct sentence to community corrections on its own findings of fact)


People v. Chavez, 359 P.3d 1040 (Colo. 2015) (where a defendant is convicted of a sex offense that is also a crime of violence he must be sentenced to an indeterminate sentence of incarceration with a minimum term in the enhanced, crime-of-violence range)


People v. Douglas, 412 P.3d 785 (Colo. App. 2015) (police officer's testimony about which part of a marijuana plant is used to make edibles and that drug dealers commonly maintain separate production and distribution centers was inadmissible expert testimony)


People v. Pendleton, 374 P.3d 509 (Colo. App. 2015) (although retrospective competency determinations are not favored, they are permitted whenever the record, together with any additional evidence available, allows the court to make an accurate assessment of the defendant's competency)


People v. Chipman, 370 P.3d 330 (Colo. App. 2015) (instead of adopting the prosecution's arguments in a response to a postconviction motion, it is better practice for a trial court to issue its own findings of fact and conclusions of law)


People v. Isom, 410 P.3d 589 (Colo. App. 2015) (under Sex Offender Lifetime Supervision Act, mandatory minimum lower term of indeterminate sentence for defendant adjudicated habitual offender against children on charge for sexual assault of child, which was class 4 felony with presumptive range of two to six years, was three times maximum of presumptive range, or 18 years, but if trial court found extraordinary aggravating circumstances, it was authorized to impose lower term of indeterminate sentence based on six times maximum of presumptive range, or 36 years)


United States v. Lozado, 776 F.3d 1119 (10th Cir. 2015) (if a declarant does not believe a statement is against his or her interest, then the statement generally cannot be admitted under the hearsay exception for statements against interest)


United States v. Margheim, 770 F.3d 1312 (10th Cir. 2014) (ten-month gap between defendant's initial appearance and that of his final codefendant was not an unreasonable delay and was thus excludable under the Speedy Trial Act)


People v. Espino-Paez, 410 P.3d 548 (Colo. App. 2014) (noncitizen defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel cannot challenge successfully completed deferred judgment under Crim. P. 32(d))


In re: People v. Steen, 318 P.3d 487 (Colo. 2014) (section 16–2–114(6) and Crim. P. 37(f) require a county court, upon request, to grant a stay of execution of a defendant's sentence pending appeal of a misdemeanor conviction to the district court)


Dooly v. People, 302 P.3d 259 (Colo. 2013) (public defender cannot file motion to dismiss petition for postconviction relief without defendant's consent)


People v. Lahr, 316 P.3d 74 (Colo. App. 2013) (when sentencing an habitual criminal to an extraordinary risk crime, the trial court is required to apply the habitual criminal enhancement to the maximum sentence in the presumptive range as modified by the extraordinary risk enhancement)


United States v. Hernandez, 711 F.3d 1194 (10th Cir. 2013) (the district court's refusal to allow defense counsel to examine a co-defendant's witness after cross-examination by the government violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights, but was harmless error)


People v. Pleshakov, 298 P.3d 228 (Colo. 2013) (the supreme court reversed the suppression order of the district court, holding that, because the defendant was not subject to custodial interrogation at the time he made the statements in question, no Miranda warnings were required)


Kazadi v. People, 291 P.3d 16 (Colo. 2012) (a criminal defendant has the right under Crim. P. 32(d) to move to withdraw his guilty plea to a deferred judgment)


Churchill v. University of Colorado, 285 P.3d 986 (Colo. 2012) (the regents were entitled to absolute immunity in a section 1983 action alleging a First Amendment violation because their employment termination proceeding was a quasi-judicial proceeding)


People v. Ray, 302 P.3d 289 (Colo. App. 2012) (a trial court has continuing jurisdiction to aid in an appeal)


People v. Laeke, 271 P.3d 1111 (Colo. 2012) (when a defendant has entered a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity and the prosecution concedes that the defendant was insane at the time of the commission of the offense, the defendant has neither a statutory nor a constitutional right to a jury trial on the affirmative defense of insanity or the merits of the charged offense)


People v. Kazadi, 284 P.3d 70 (Colo. App. 2011) (written advisement form did not sufficiently advise defendant of the presumptive mandatory deportation consequences of guilty plea)


Churchill v. University of Colorado, 293 P.3d 16 (Colo. App. 2010) (the Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling that the University was entitled to quasi-judicial immunity, its vacation of the jury's verdict, and its entry of judgment in favor of the University on Professor Churchill's claim that the University violated his First Amendment rights when it dismissed him)


People v. Sanchez, 253 P.3d 1260 (Colo. App. 2010) (there was an inconsistency between the jury verdicts for attempted first degree murder and those for first and second degree assault under the heat of passion, but the inconsistency did not require reversal because the existence or absence of heat of passion is not a necessary element of either assault charge)


Crumb v. People, 230 P.3d 726 (Colo. 2010) (the trial court abused its discretion by denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea, because the trial judge impermissibly participated in the plea negotiations that led to the guilty plea)


People v. Alley, 232 P.3d 272 (Colo. App. 2010) (trial courts are given wide latitude in determining the admissibility of an intoxicated witness's testimony, and it is the jury's role to determine the witness's credibility)


People v. Everett, 250 P.3d 649 (Colo. App. 2010) (sentence vacated because district court misapplied crime of violence enhancer)


People v. Laeke, 280 P.3d 1 (Colo. App. 2009) (order of commitment vacated because defendant had a constitutional and statutory right to a jury trial even though the prosecution confessed insanity)


Edwards v. People, 196 P.3d 1138 (Colo. 2008) (an offender who has earned presentence confinement credit is entitled to have that credit deducted from his mandatory parole)


People v. Crumb, 203 P.3d 587 (Colo. App. 2008) (judge's comparison of post-plea sentence with post-trial sentence and comment that "I'm not going to be a happy judge if the People tell me we don't have a deal" was impermissible participation in plea discussions, but harmless error), rev'd, Crumb v. People, 230 P.3d 726 (Colo. 2010)


United States v. Zapata, 546 F.3d 1179 (10th Cir. 2008) (an objection to a jury instruction by one defendant is not sufficient to preserve the issue for appeal for another defendant)


Leyva v. People, 184 P.3d 48 (Colo. 2008) (correction of an illegal sentence renews the statutory three-year deadline for filing a petition for postconviction relief)


People v. Wallin, 167 P.3d 183 (Colo. App. 2007) (defendant's sentence was vacated because the trial court erred by denying his request for conflict-free counsel at his sentencing hearing)


People v. Reese, 155 P.3d 477 (Colo. App. 2006) (for purposes of proportionality review, second degree forgery and attempted escape by walking away from a facility are not grave and serious offenses, but robbery is a per se grave and serious offense)


People v. Martinez, 128 P.3d 291 (Colo. App. 2005) (prior misdemeanor convictions fall within the Apprendi prior conviction exception)


Verdecia v. Adams, 327 F.3d 1171 (10th Cir. 2003) (prison officials were entitled to qualified immunity in a section 1983 alleging Eighth Amendment violation for placing prisoner in a cell with gang members who assaulted him because of his Cuban nationality)


Farmer v. Perrill, 288 F.3d 1254 (10th Cir. 2002) (prison officials were not entitled to qualified immunity in section 1983 action alleging a strip search of a prisoner in front of other prisoners and prison officials in violation of the Fourth Amendment)


Farmer v. Perrill, 275 F.3d 958 (10th Cir. 2001) (prisoner's Bivens action alleging Eighth Amendment violation was barred by dismissal of her FTCA action)

The Noble Law Firm, LLC

215 Union Boulevard, Suite 305

Lakewood, CO 80228   Map


Tel: (303) 232-5160

Fax: (303) 232-5162

An Appellate Law Firm