Legal Opinion

People v. Woodard

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided March 30, 1989No. 87CA1585PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge STERNBERG.

Asserting that the trial court committed error by failing to advise him that he could testify notwithstanding any contrary advice of his lawyer, the defendant, James Woodard, appeals from a judgment of conviction entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of aggravated robbery and crime of violence. While we agree the advisement was deficient, we affirm the judgment.

People v. Curtis, 681 P.2d 504 (Colo.1984) established certain procedural safeguards relating to a defendant’s right to testify. No exact litany is prescribed; however, Curtis specifies that the trial…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. CurtisSupreme Court of Colorado · 1984
  2. People v. MozeeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1986
  3. People v. McMullenColorado Court of Appeals · 1986
  4. People v. FondaColorado Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. People v. RoelkerColorado Court of Appeals · 1989

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Boyd v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
  2. Brennan v. VoseSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2001
  3. People v. LindseyColorado Court of Appeals · 1990
  4. People v. RoelkerColorado Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. Boyd v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991

2 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