Colorado Court of Appeals Opinions || December 10, 2009

Colorado Court of Appeals -- December 10, 2009No. 08CA1925. People v. Ford.

Division IVEl Paso County District Court No. 07CR5767

Honorable David S. Prince, Judge


The People of the State of Colorado,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

Arthur Lewis Ford,

Defendant-Appellant.


Opinion by JUDGE BERNARD Webb and Román, JJ., concur

Announced December 10, 2009


This appeal presents a question concerning the effect of a guilty plea. After he pled guilty, defendant, Arthur Lewis Ford, filed a postconviction motion alleging that the statute upon which his conviction was based violated his equal protection rights as applied to him. The trial court denied his motion, and he appealed.  The court of appeals considered the general rule that a valid guilty plea renders irrelevant all claims that a defendant’s constitutional rights have been violated, and denied this appeal based in part on the failure to file an adequate record regarding any preservation of the right to appeal the underlying statute upon which the guilty plea was based.  The court of appeals considered this to be a "traditional guilty plea", which waives those rights not expressly raised prior to the plea of guilty, and would not allow the defendant to raise a post-conviction as applied equal protection challenge.

Mesa County District Court No. 08CR503

Honorable Brian J. Flynn, Judge


The People of the State of Colorado,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

Kalin Andrew Daniels,

Defendant-Appellant.


JUDGMENT AFFIRMED

Division V Opinion by JUDGE GABRIEL Connelly, J., concurs Graham, J., specially concurs

Announced December 10, 2009


Defendant, Kalin Andrew Daniels, appeals his judgment of conviction for second degree assault-causing serious bodily injury. The victim of the assault suffered a fractured rib and a lacerated spleen. Defendant asserted that neither of these injuries amounted to "serious bodily injury," as defined by section 18-1-901 (3)(p), C.R.S. 2009.  He based this challenge on the failure of the prosecution to show that

(1) the victim’s broken rib was of the second or third degree or

(2) the lacerated spleen involved a substantial risk of death or protracted loss or impairment of the function of that organ.

The court of appeals ruled that as an apparent matter of first impression in Colorado, that any break or fracture is sufficient to establish "serious bodily injury" under section 18-1-901(3) (p). The court did not look to the issue of whether the lacerated spleen was proven to raise a substantial risk of death, and found that only a fracture of a rib was required to find the defendant guilty of second degree assault.  Breaks or fractures were distinguished from 'burns of the second or third degree", which indicated a commonly understood classification of burns, that would not be applied to breaks or fractures.

Uncategorizeddenverlawblog