Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
State v. Shoen

4 Citing cases

  1. People v. Willoughby

    524 P.3d 1186 (Colo. 2023)   Cited 3 times
    Stating that daylight encounters weigh against custody

    Specifically, the People argue that the trial court erred because this is the standard for whether someone is seized under the Fourth Amendment. See People v. Shoen, 2017 CO 65, ¶ 10, 395 P.3d 327, 330. We have previously stated that "[a] trial court errs by applying the ‘free to leave’ standard in evaluating whether a suspect is in custody under Miranda doctrine."

  2. People v. Thompson

    500 P.3d 1075 (Colo. 2021)   Cited 11 times
    Acknowledging that our caselaw "reflects some inconsistency in our approach to jurisdiction in interlocutory appeals," but declining to resolve it without notice to the parties

    ¶47 Indeed, in case after case we mention our jurisdiction under section 16-12-102(2) by simply dropping a footnote to acknowledge the prosecution's certification that the suppressed evidence is substantial. See, e.g. , People v. Cox , 2017 CO 8, ¶ 10 n.3, 401 P.3d 509, 511 n.3 ("The People certified that this appeal was not taken for the purposes of delay and that the evidence suppressed is a substantial part of the proof in the People's case."); People v. Ashford , 2020 CO 16, ¶ 8 n.1, 458 P.3d 124, 126 n.1 (same); People v. Threlkel , 2019 CO 18, ¶ 12 n.2, 438 P.3d 722, 726 n.2 (same); People v. Brown , 2019 CO 63, ¶ 8 n.2, 461 P.3d 1, 2 n.2 (same); People v. Shoen , 2017 CO 65, ¶ 6 n.2, 395 P.3d 327, 330 n.2 (same); People v. Chavez-Barragan , 2016 CO 16, ¶ 7 n.2, 365 P.3d 981, 983 n.2 (same); People v. Delacruz , 2016 CO 76, ¶ 1 n.1, 384 P.3d 349, 351 n.1 (same); People v. N.A.S., 2014 CO 65, ¶ 4 n.5, 329 P.3d 285, 288 n.5 (same). We do this because we have consistently recognized that it is the role of prosecutors to make informed and careful certifications, and it is not our role to determine whether the prosecution has properly assessed the value of the suppressed evidence.

  3. People v. Tarr

    511 P.3d 672 (Colo. App. 2022)   Cited 8 times
    Referring to careless driving resulting in death as a lesser nonincluded offense of the vehicular homicide charge

    We defer to the trial court's factual findings if those findings are supported by competent evidence in the record; however, we review the trial court's legal conclusions de novo." People v. Shoen , 2017 CO 65, ¶ 8, 395 P.3d 327, 330 (citation omitted). ¶ 23

  4. People v. Gamboa-Jimenez

    508 P.3d 263 (Colo. App. 2022)

    People v. Marujo , 192 P.3d 1003, 1006 (Colo. 2008). The first two are seizures, and thus need to be justified, see People v. Fields , 2018 CO 2, ¶ 12, 411 P.3d 661 (describing the necessary justifications for arrests and for investigatory stops), while the last is not a seizure, and requires no justification, see People v. Shoen , 2017 CO 65, ¶ 10, 395 P.3d 327 ("Consensual encounters between police and citizens do not implicate Fourth Amendment protections ...."). Traffic stops are typically investigatory stops.