People v. Swepston

3 Citing cases

  1. Lusero v. Welt

    223 F. App'x 780 (10th Cir. 2007)   Cited 9 times

    A Colorado inmate has no constitutional right to good time credit, see Kodama v. Johnson, 786 P.2d 417, 419 (Colo. 1990), even though "the accumulation of good time credits serves . . . the purpose of determining an inmate's parole eligibility date," People v. Swepston, 822 P.2d 510, 512 (Colo.Ct.App. 1991). Good time credits do not count toward sentence reduction.

  2. Smith v. Anderson

    Civil Action No. 10-cv-01869-PAB-KMT (D. Colo. Aug. 24, 2012)

    Nevertheless, good time credits do not count toward sentence reduction. Lusero v. Welt, 223 F. App'x 780, 784 (10th Cir. 2007) (citing People v. Swepston, 822 P.2d 510, 512 (Colo. App. 1991)). "Thus, [a prisoner's] loss of good time credits [does] not 'inevitably' increase[ ] the duration of his sentence, and accordingly does not give rise to a right to due process."

  3. People v. Whalin

    885 P.2d 293 (Colo. App. 1994)   Cited 7 times
    Holding that sentencing court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing defendant to sixteen years for sexual assault on a child

    Rocha v. People, 713 P.2d 350 (Colo. 1986); People v. Swepston, 822 P.2d 510 (Colo.App. 1991). Relevant factors to be considered include the nature of the offense, the character of the offender, the public interest in safety, and deterrence of others.