Legal Opinion

Trueblood v. Tinsley

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided December 4, 1961No. 19915PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Frantz.

Five reasons are urged for the reversal of the “order and judgment” of the trial court entered against the petitioner Trueblood in habeas corpus proceedings. We shall consider these reasons seriatim.

1. “The judgment and sentence was not within statutory limitations in that petitioner was not subject to the so-called sex offenders act.” To support this contention Trueblood theorizes that the evidence fails to bring him within the purview of C.R.S. ’53, 39-19-1 et seq., 1960 Perm. Cum. Supp., providing for sentencing sex offenders, and therefore any sentence which…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Minnesota Ex Rel. Pearson v. Probate Court of Ramsey CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. State v. EvansIdaho Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Board of Prison Commissioners v. De MossCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1914
  4. In Re CallahanMichigan Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Freeman v. TinsleySupreme Court of Colorado · 1957

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. People v. MarcySupreme Court of Colorado · 1981
  2. Heninger v. CharnesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1980
  3. R.Mcg. v. J.W.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1980
  4. Jordan v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1966
  5. People v. HulseSupreme Court of Colorado · 1976

27 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