sixth amendment
-
Douglas County judge violated defendant’s right to counsel at sentencing, appeals court finds
—
by
A Douglas County judge violated a defendant’s constitutional right to the counsel of her choice by refusing to postpone sentencing until her lawyer returned to the country, Colorado’s second-highest court concluded on Wednesday. In early 2023, Lyndie J. Felsher received a three-year sentence in community corrections after pleading guilty to a felony drunk driving offense.…
-
Appeals court, for third time, confirms new trial necessary for Alamosa County judge’s public trial violation
—
by
Colorado’s second-highest court confirmed for the third time last week that an Alamosa County judge violated a defendant’s constitutional right to a public trial, which requires the reversal of his convictions. The unusual number of opinions in Gilberto Andres Montoya’s appeal, and the shifting rationale for why a new trial is necessary, stems in part…
-
Appeals court orders new trial after Denver judge wrongly let defendant represent self
—
by
A Denver judge incorrectly found that a defendant understood what he was doing by giving up his constitutional right to counsel, Colorado’s second-highest court concluded on Thursday in overturning the man’s assault convictions. Criminal defendants are allowed to represent themselves at trial by waiving their right to counsel. However, such a waiver must be “voluntary,…
-
Appeals court reverses murder conviction after Denver judge violated public trial right
—
by
Colorado’s second-highest court reversed a defendant’s murder conviction on Thursday because a Denver judge violated his constitutional right to a public trial. Due to an unusually large jury pool at Edward R. Sandoval’s 2022 trial, Chief Judge Christopher J. Baumann did not allow observers to be present in his courtroom during jury selection. Although the…
-
‘Jury of one’: Federal judge speaks about how to handle non-jury trials
—
by
In 2023 and 2024, Colorado’s federal district court saw a total of approximately 100 cases end in a trial. Most of the civil and criminal cases were resolved through a jury trial, but a smaller number took place through bench trials, meaning a judge rendered the ultimate decision. “What are the judges looking for? They’re…
-
Divided Colorado Supreme Court: Criminal trial livestreams not enough to satisfy public trial right
—
by
A slim majority of the Colorado Supreme Court decided on Monday that livestreaming criminal proceedings without also opening the physical courtroom to spectators may violate the constitutional guarantee of a public trial. Addressing an issue that arose during the early COVID-19 pandemic, the justices considered whether it was acceptable for trial judges to restrict their…
-
Appeals court finds Denver judge wrongly let child witness testify by CCTV
—
by
Colorado’s second-highest court ruled on Thursday that a Denver judge violated the constitutional rights of a juvenile defendant by allowing the victim, who was also a child, to testify in a different room out of concern for the “influence” of the defendant’s parents. However, a three-judge panel for the Court of Appeals concluded the error…
-
10th Circuit rules COVID access restrictions constitutional in criminal trial
—
by
The Denver-based federal appeals court decided on Tuesday that the drastic restrictions on courtroom access during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic did not violate a convicted defendant’s constitutional right to a public trial. A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit also rejected the argument that the trial court’s method of…
-
Colorado justices weigh constitutional implications of livestreaming criminal trials
—
by
With the Sixth Amendment guaranteeing criminal defendants the right to a public trial, members of the Colorado Supreme Court grappled on Tuesday with a question that may have never arisen without a global pandemic: If a judge requires spectators to watch the trial remotely, is there a constitutional violation? In a pair of cases stemming…
-
Colorado justices to decide whether decades-old constitutional violation affects man’s 2021 conviction
—
by
The Colorado Supreme Court announced on Tuesday it will determine whether an alleged violation of a man’s constitutional right to counsel more than 30 years ago has any bearing on his 2021 drunk driving conviction. At least three of the court’s seven members must agree to hear an appeal. Under Colorado law, driving under the influence…
