Banks v. People

17 Citing cases

  1. People v. Rayford

    725 P.2d 1142 (Colo. 1986)   Cited 14 times
    Holding that probable cause can exist despite a negative field test if sufficient other factors were present

    Probable cause to arrest exists when there are facts and circumstances sufficient to cause a person of reasonable caution to believe that at the time of the arrest an offense has been or is being committed by the person to be arrested. Banks v. People, 696 P.2d 293 (Colo. 1985); People v. Florez, 680 P.2d 219 (Colo. 1984).

  2. Crosby v. Watkins

    599 F. Supp. 2d 1257 (D. Colo. 2009)   Cited 2 times

    State Court Record Vol. 2 at 327. 696 P.2d 293 (Colo. 1985). 844 S.W.2d 885 (Tex. App. 1992).

  3. People v. District Court

    761 P.2d 206 (Colo. 1988)   Cited 5 times

    Accord Banks v. People, 696 P.2d 293, 298-99 (Colo. 1985).

  4. Robinson v. Smelser

    Civil Action No. 11-cv-00659-WYD (D. Colo. Apr. 17, 2012)

    See Smallwood v. Gibson, 191 F.3d 1257, 1265 (10th Cir.1999) (holding that petitioner was not entitled to habeas review of Fourth Amendment claim where petitioner's trial counsel informed the trial court of the factual basis for a Fourth Amendment claim, appellate counsel presented the issue to the state appellate court on direct appeal, and the state courts "thoughtfully considered the facts underlying petitioner's Fourth Amendment claim" but rejected it on the merits by applying appropriate Supreme Court precedents). See Banks v. People, 696 P.2d 293, 296 (Colo. 1985) (citing Supreme Court Fourth Amendment case law); People v. Abeyta, 795 P.2d 1324, 1327 (Colo. 1990) (same). Applicant does not assert, nor is it apparent from the state court record, that the state courts failed to recognize or wilfully ignored controlling legal standards.

  5. Irvin v. People of State Warden Chapman

    Civil Action No. 10-cv-02510-PAB (D. Colo. Oct. 20, 2011)

    Irvin, Pre-Answer Resp. Ex. E, at 10 (citing People v. Washington, 865 P.2d 145, 147 (Colo. 1994), People v. Tufts, 717 P.2d 485, 491 (Colo. 1986), citing Banks v. People, 696 P.2d 293, 296 (Colo. 1985) (and Supreme Court cases cited therein)). Colo. Rev. Stat. ยง16-3-102 provides:

  6. Garnett v. Commonwealth

    275 Va. 397 (Va. 2008)   Cited 26 times
    Affirming after in camera review on appeal of allegedly exculpatory statements of the victim that were withheld from the defendant based on a determination that they were not material

    We are unable to conclude that Grunewald has been prejudiced by the government's failure to produce the handwritten notes. Id.; accord United States v. Van Brandy, 726 F.2d 548, 551 (9th Cir. 1984); Banks v. People, 696 P.2d 293, 297-98 (Colo. 1985). While Brady does not embrace a "best evidence" rule prohibiting the use of summaries, such summaries of exculpatory evidence must be complete and accurate.

  7. People v. Saiz

    32 P.3d 441 (Colo. 2001)   Cited 40 times
    Concluding that the trial court properly excluded videotaped statement where the offer of proof was relatively limited in nature, solely for impeachment, and not alleged to be different or more probative than other related testimony

    See CRE 1001-1002. It is a rule limiting the admission of copies rather than a rule requiring the admission of an original recording, and in any event it has no application where the recorded events themselves, rather than the contents of the document recording them, are at issue. Id. Otherwise competent testimony of first-hand sense impressions is admissible to prove what occurred, despite the availability of a videotape depicting the same event. Cf. Banks v. People, 696 P.2d 293, 297-98 (Colo. 1985) (transcript of event was original of equal dignity with tape recording and could not be excluded by best evidence rule). While videotaped recordings of conversations or interviews may well have probative value beyond the mere recitation of the language used in the interview, that is not always the case.

  8. People v. Diaz

    793 P.2d 1181 (Colo. 1990)   Cited 15 times
    Finding lack of probable cause in part because there was no information provided from which the court could assess the informants' veracity

    Tufts, 717 P.2d 485. Probable cause to arrest exists when facts and circumstances within the arresting officer's knowledge are sufficient to support a reasonable belief that a crime has been or is being committed by the person arrested. Tufts, 717 P.2d at 491; Banks v. People, 696 P.2d 293 (Colo. 1985); ยง 16-3-102(1), 8A C.R.S. (1986). In determining whether there is probable cause to arrest, the totality of facts and circumstances known to the officer at the time of the arrest must be considered.

  9. People v. Tufts

    717 P.2d 485 (Colo. 1986)   Cited 17 times
    Finding that the defendants' reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of a bag supported standing, where the bag was closed when discovered by the detective

    Probable cause to arrest exists when facts and circumstances within the arresting officer's knowledge are sufficient to support a reasonable belief that a crime has been or is being committed by the person arrested. Banks v. People, 696 P.2d 293 (Colo. 1985); People v. Tottenhoff, 691 P.2d 340 (Colo. 1984); People v. Florez, 680 P.2d 219 (Colo.

  10. People v. Sparks

    434 P.3d 713 (Colo. App. 2018)   Cited 2 times
    Explaining that the law does not recognize the child as the initiator of unlawful sexual contact or activity with an adult

    And any non-testimonial records or documents about her age would be subject to the best evidence rule. See CRE 1002 ; Banks v. People , 696 P.2d 293, 297 (Colo. 1985) (content of writing being directly at issue invokes best evidence rule). Again, the record offers no help.