Cropper v. People

In this case, we review the constitutionality of section 16-3-309(5), C.R.S. (2010), as applied to petitioner, David Lee Cropper.1 We hold that, based on Hingjos-Mendoza v. People, 169 P.3d 662 (Colo.2007), Cropper waived his confrontation rights and, therefore, the statute was constitutional as applied. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the court of appeals.

I. Facts and Proceedings Below

After a jury trial, Cropper was convicted of second degree burglary and theft. Pursuant to Crim. P. 16, prior to trial, the prosecution provided Cropper a list of the witnesses that it planned to call at…