 |
CBA Home | CLE Home | Contact Us |  Cart - empty |
Search |
|||||||
Most Viewed |
Colorado Supreme Court Opinions
No. 04SA186. People v. Darlington. In this original proceeding, the prosecution and defendant had entered into a written plea agreement in which defendant would plead nolo contendere to misdemeanor criminal mischief, subject to a two-year deferred sentence, restitution, costs, and fines. The parties presented this agreement to the trial court, but the court rejected the tendered plea on the grounds that the language of CRS § 18-1.3-102, Colorado’s deferred sentencing statute, does not explicitly allow a plea of nolo contendere. Defendant sought relief pursuant to C.A.R. 21. The Supreme Court issued a rule to show cause on the issue of whether the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction when it ruled that § 18-1.3-102(1) precluded the defendant from entering a plea of nolo contendere. Noting that courts have long recognized a plea of nolo contendere as the full equivalent to a guilty plea in criminal proceedings, the Supreme Court reads the use of "plea of guilty" in the statute as a generic phrase. The Court now holds that CRS § 18-1.3-102 does not contravene the court’s authority to accept a plea of nolo contendere. Accordingly, the Court makes the rule absolute and remands for further proceedings.
No. 04SA356. Weil, M.D. v. Dillon Companies, Inc. The Colorado Supreme Court holds that plaintiff’s generic claims for pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life in this case do not constitute an implied waiver of the physician–patient privilege for medical services wholly unrelated to his claimed injuries. Therefore, the Court holds that the defense may not compel plaintiff to authorize the releases of all his medical records unrelated to his claimed injuries. |
||||||
