 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Bryant v. Community Choice Credit Union, Court of Appeals No.: 05CA0910,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION SIX, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Assets of a multiple party account, opened by decedent and her agent, were subject to a constructive trust because only $ 26 came from the agent's funds, $ 331,069 came from decedent, the credit union knew that, and in order to secure personal loans the agent pledged certificates of deposit that in equity and good conscience did not belong to him.
|
|||||
| Lombard v. Colo. Outdoor Educ. Ctr., Inc., Court of Appeals No.: 05CA1781,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a teacher and school district's premises liability action that arose when the teacher fell from a ladder at a camp, an education center and a camp were entitled to summary judgment. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-21-115, based on actual knowledge of a dangerous condition, abrogated negligence per se, based on constructive notice of a building code.
|
|||||
| People v. Banark, Court of Appeals No. 05CA0843,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION SIX, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After defendant's probation was revoked and he was resentenced, he had already been convicted of indecent exposure, which encompassed conduct to which he admitted at the revocation hearing. If the trial court relied on that conviction, the aggravated range sentence would be affirmed because it constituted a prior conviction that was Blakely-exempt.
|
|||||
| People v. French, Court of Appeals No. 03CA2477,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In addition to relying on defendant being on bond for a previous felony, trial court relied upon defendant's previous felony conviction for imposing the aggravated sentence. Based on his prior conviction, defendant's sentence did not run afoul of Blakely. Thus, the enhanced sentenced did not violate Sixth Amendment or offend due process principles.
|
|||||
| People v. Grant, Court of Appeals No. 03CA1034,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a murder and assault case, where defendant pled not guilty by reason of insanity, Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 16-8-105.5(1), 16-8-106(1), trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting another mental examination because prior experts' opinions were incomplete and a new assessment of defendant's behavior on the day of the offenses was necessary.
|
|||||
| People v. Graybeal, Court of Appeals No.: 05CA0089,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Possession of marijuana under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-18-406(1) (2006), was not a lesser included offense of the charges brought against defendant under Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 18-18-406(7)(b) and 18-6-701(1); because proof of the elements of the transfer offense did not prove the elements of possession, possession was not a lesser included offense.
|
|||||
| People v. Hernandez, Court of Appeals No.: 05CA1048,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION SIX, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not err in concluding that Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11.7-105 required it to order sex offender treatment as a condition of defendant's probation. Defendant was a sex offender for purposes of the statute because his current offense was committed after January 1, 1994, and he had previously been convicted of a sexual offense.
|
|||||
| People v. McAfee, Court of Appeals No. 04CA1480,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court improperly imposed an aggravated sentence for second degree kidnapping defendant's admissions in the presentence investigation report did not qualify as an "admitted fact" for purposes of imposing an aggravated sentence under Apprendi and Blakely.
|
|||||
| People v. Mintz, Court of Appeals No.: 04CA1024,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION ONE, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was insufficient evidence that digital contact occurred in different place than penile contact. Thus, two types of sexual contact constituted single factual offense, and the two convictions for assault on child by one in position of trust and for aggravated incest, Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 18-3-405.3, 18-6-302, were merged into single convictions.
|
|||||
| Sch. Dist. No. 12 v. Sec. Life of Denver Ins. Co., Court of Appeals No.: 05CA0849,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, January 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a school district condemned two parcels of property, a new trial was necessary as to the damages for Parcel B because the trial court's resolution of the jury's inconsistent verdict was a change of substance since it conflicted with a jury instruction; remand was warranted as to the attorney fees under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-1-122(1.5).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
