Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Ostuni

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided November 25, 2002No. 02SA157Published

1DissentJustice Martinez

The Majority’s interpretation of the trial court’s mittimus detailing Ostuni’s presen-tence confinement credit is contrary to the clear language of the mittimus. Common sense requires that we review the language of the mittimus before resorting to any construction. Because the mittimus clearly allocated presentence confinement credit to Os-tuni’s two new offenses, I conclude that the DOC violated the trial court’s order. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.

I. The Mittimus Awards Credits to the New Offenses

While Ostuni was serving a period of discretionary parole on a conviction for assault in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bullard v. Department of CorrectionsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
  2. Meredith v. ZavarasSupreme Court of Colorado · 1998
  3. Colorado v. GrangruthSupreme Court of Colorado · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API