Legal Opinion · Concurrence

People v. Casper

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided February 5, 1981No. 78-595Published

1Concurrence

STERNBERG, Judge,

specially concurring.

I agree that this conviction should be affirmed, but am not persuaded by the majority's attempt to harmonize the affirmance here with the reversal in People v. Casper, Colo.App., 620 P.2d 48, (1980). Rather, I would affirm this conviction for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion there, where Casper's conviction was reversed because the jury was not told it could consider evidence of a prior robbery as probative of identity, even though identity would have been a "valid purpose" for receiving the evidence.

Additionally, the complex analysis engaged…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. People v. HoneySupreme Court of Colorado · 1979
  2. People v. IhmeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1974
  3. People v. ReedColorado Court of Appeals · 1979
  4. People v. MejiaSupreme Court of Colorado · 1975
  5. People v. CasperColorado Court of Appeals · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API