 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| People v. Minjarez, Case No. 03SA219,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, December 15, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Suppressing defendant's confession to officers was proper, as he had been "in custody" while being questioned; but, as his decision to then talk to his wife in the officers' presence was his own choice, suppressing his statement to her was error.
|
|||||
| Wick Communs. Co. v. Montrose County Bd. of County Comm'rs, No. 03SA194,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, December 15, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The newspaper could not make the required showing that the county manager's diary was likely a public record. Consequently, the state open records act did not apply and therefore the trial court did not have authority to order an in camera review.
|
|||||
| Fitzke v. People, Case Number: 03PDJ050,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, December 17, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner's application for readmission to the practice of law was granted because the character deficits giving rise to petitioner's disbarment had been removed so as to insure that similar misconduct did not recur.
|
|||||
| Goff v. People, Case Number: 03PDJ049,
SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO, PRESIDING DISCIPLINARY JUDGE, December 17, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The suspended attorney met his burden of proof on each element necessary for reinstatement where he underwent a fundamental change in character and demonstrated rehabilitation and fitness to practice law.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
