Summaries of Published Opinions
| Publication year | 2022 |
| Pages | 89 |
FROM THE COURTS COLORADO SUPREME COURT
January 10, 2022
2022 CO 1. No. 20SC22. Tibbels v. People. Jury Instructions—Reasonable Doubt.
In this case, the Supreme Court considered whether statements the trial court made to a jury venire to explain the concept of reasonable doubt effectively lowered the prosecution's burden of proof. During voir dire of the prospective jurors, the trial court provided a real-life example of the doubt a prospective homebuyer would have upon observing a structurally significant crack in the home's foundation, equating that doubt to a reasonable doubt.
The Court concluded that the proper test for determining whether a trial court's statements to the jury lowered the prosecution's burden of proof is a functional one. An appellate court must ask whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury understood the court's statements, in the context of the instructions as a whole and the trial record, to allow a conviction based on a standard lower than beyond a reasonable doubt. Applying this test to the specific facts presented here, the Court concluded that it is reasonably likely that the jury understood the court's statements to allow a conviction on a stand and lower than beyond a reasonable doubt, which constitutes structural error.
Accordingly, the Court reversed the judgment of the division below.
2022 CO 2. No. 20SC353. Pettigrew v. People.
Jury Instructions—Reasonable Doubt—Constitutional Harmless Error.
In this case, the Supreme Court considered whether certain statements the trial court made to the jury venire during voir dire lowered the prosecution's burden of proof and thus violated due process. The Court further considered whether the Court of Appeals division erred in determining that a warrant to search defendant's cell phone and that warrant's supporting affidavit, when properly redacted to exclude all information obtained as a result of defendant's initial unlawful arrest, satisfied the Fourth Amendment's particularity requirement.
The Court concluded there is no reasonable likelihood that the jury would have understood the trial court's statements, in the context of the instructions as a whole and the trial record, to lower the prosecution's burden of proof below the reasonable doubt standard. In addition, assuming without deciding that the warrant and its supporting affidavit...
To continue reading
Request your trial