Legal Opinion

Bynum v. Kautzky

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided December 4, 1989No. 88SA359PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Mullarkey

This is an appeal of a denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus and we have jurisdiction of this appeal pursuant to section 13-4-102(l)(e), 6A C.R.S. (1987). The appellant, Cecil 0. Bynum, sought his unconditional release from the custody of the Department of Corrections (the Department), arguing that the plain meaning of the statutes governing parole and sentencing precludes the reincarceration of an inmate whose time actually served, together with vested good time and earned time credits, equals the sentence originally imposed. The district court disagreed with Bynum’s interpretation…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. GuentherSupreme Court of Colorado · 1987
  2. Martinez v. Continental EnterprisesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1986
  3. State, Department of Revenue, Motor Vehicle Division v. BorquezSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
  4. Industrial Commission v. MilkaSupreme Court of Colorado · 1966
  5. Renneke v. KautzkySupreme Court of Colorado · 1989

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Thiret v. KautzkySupreme Court of Colorado · 1990
  2. Templeman v. GunterCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
  3. Jefferson County Board of Equalization v. GerganoffSupreme Court of Colorado · 2010
  4. Martinez v. BadisSupreme Court of Colorado · 1992
  5. Simpson v. Bijou Irrigation Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2003

40 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