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Flores-Heredia v. People, 395 P.3d (Colo. 2017) (a defendant’s guilty plea is withdrawn and the charge is dismissed by operation of law on successful completion of a deferred judgment)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, 2016 COA 169M (Colo. App. Nov. 17, 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, 2016 COA 93 (Colo. App. Jun. 16, 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)

 

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, 2015 COA 155 (Colo. App. Oct. 22, 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, 2015 COA 89 (Colo. App. Jul. 2, 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, 2014 COA 126 (Colo. App. Sep. 25, 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