Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Chavarria-Sanchez

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided March 5, 2009No. 08CA0241Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Judge TAUBMAN

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I agree with the majority that section 16-3-503(1)(c), C.R.8.2008, limits bond forfeiture to fees collected by professional bonding agents, rather than the entire posted bond, when a non-appearing defendant is later determined to have been present illegally in the United States. However, I would not address the legislative history in conjunction with that statute. See Bd. of County Commr's v. ExxonMobil Oil Corp., 192 P.3d 582, 585-86 (Colo.App.2008) (if the language of a statute is clear, we need not resort to other rules of statutory…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hill v. DeWittSupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
  2. Ficarra v. Department of Regulatory Agencies, Division of InsuranceSupreme Court of Colorado · 1993
  3. Denver, South Park & Pacific Railway Co. v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Colorado · 1878
  4. City of Colorado Springs v. PowellSupreme Court of Colorado · 2007
  5. People v. D.K.B.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1993

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API