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
People v. Thames

4 Citing cases

  1. People v. Thames

    467 P.3d 1181 (Colo. App. 2019)   Cited 11 times
    Concluding that the admission of a video of the defendant in a prison uniform did not violate the presumption of innocence because, unlike the impact of seeing a defendant in prison attire throughout the trial, the video was only one hour and 14 minutes long and therefore was not a constant reminder that would create a continuing prejudicial influence in the minds of the jurors

    The Colorado Supreme Court reversed. People v. Thames , 2015 CO 18, ¶¶ 27-28, 344 P.3d 891, 898. ¶ 11 At trial, Thames pursued an alternative suspect defense, arguing that Dewey had sexually assaulted and killed J.T. (Thames presented evidence that other individuals may also have committed the crimes.

  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

    As I have noted in the past, this requirement is a real, jurisdictional prerequisite to our exercise of review and should be treated as such. See People v. N.A.S. , 2014 CO 65, ¶¶ 60–67, 329 P.3d 285, 298–300 (Márquez, J., dissenting); People v. Thames , 2015 CO 18, ¶¶ 29–36, 344 P.3d 891, 899–900 (Márquez, J., dissenting). "Substantial part of the proof" is not a high bar, but it at least requires the evidence to be identifiable in the briefing or record before us.

  3. People v. Bagwell

    514 P.3d 953 (Colo. App. 2022)

    ¶ 46 The prosecution bears the burden of proving both the validity of a defendant's Miranda waiver and the voluntariness of his statements by a preponderance of the evidence. People v. Thames , 2015 CO 18, ¶ 12, 344 P.3d 891 ; Effland , 240 P.3d at 878.

  4. People v. Bondsteel

    442 P.3d 880 (Colo. App. 2015)   Cited 23 times
    In People v. Bondsteel, 2015 COA 165, ¶ 53, 442 P.3d 880, aff'd, 2019 CO 26, 439 P.3d 847, the court reasoned that verdicts by which the defendant was acquitted of five charges and convicted of a lesser charge showed that the jury was able to separate the facts and legal theories involved in each offense.

    Second, we have independently reviewed a video recording of the lineups. SeePeople v. Thames, 2015 CO 18, ¶ 24, 344 P.3d 891 (court noted its "independent review of the video interrogation"). Our review does not support Bondsteel's assertion that K.D. and N.D. focused on the participants' eyes.