This podcast covers case summaries distributed on 8/1/2025

Cases:

Terra Mgmt. Grp., LLC v. Keaten, 2025 CO 40, __ P.3d __, 2025 WL 1802067 (June 23, 2025); In a civil action, the Court declares that a trial court may sanction a party for the destruction of relevant evidence if the party knew or should have known that (1) litigation was pending or reasonably foreseeable and (2) the destroyed evidence was relevant to that litigation. Thus, a duty to preserve relevant evidence arises when a party knows or should know that litigation is pending or is reasonably foreseeable. "Reasonably foreseeable" litigation refers to litigation that is imminent, likely, or reasonably anticipated.

People v. Casper, 2025COA69 (July 31, 2025); In a post-Counterman analysis, the COA affirms Casper's stalking conviction because the instructions required the jury to find that Casper knowingly made a credible threat to the recipient of his numerous emails. And there was sufficient evidence to sustain the harassment conviction that did not merge into the stalking conviction.

UNPUBLISHED People v. Murphy, 24CA0097 (July 31, 2025); The district court had jurisdiction to address Murphy's motions for return of his property (car). His request was timely as he first made the request (orally) at sentencing. Any deficiencies in the adequacy of the oral request did not deprive the court of jurisdiction because the government conceded the request, and the court orally granted the motion despite any deficiencies.

UNPUBLISHED People in Interest of XXB, 24CA0063 (July 31, 2025); The court lost authority to enter the restitution order 91-days after sentencing. Although the court did make an express finding of good-cause to allow the prosecution time to gather more information, the court failed to make an express finding of good-cause to extend the court's deadline to determine restitution beyond 91-days.

UNPUBLISHED People v. Chadwick, 24CA0346 (July 10, 2025); We use this opinion merely as a vehicle to plug Protect Ethical Prosecutors (PEP), an organization founded and led by Iris Eytan, that is dedicated to eradicating (or at least reducing) prosecutorial misconduct in Colorado. https://protectethicalprosecutors.org/

U.S. v. Spradley, No. 23-3222 (10th Cir. July 29, 2025); In a sex-for-money sting operation, there was sufficient evidence of entrapment such that the trial court erred by failing to provide an instruction requiring the prosecution to disprove this defense. The error was not harmless under any standard. Lastly, the government presented sufficient evidence such that a retrial was not prohibited.

Links:

Terra Mgmt v. Keaton 2025 CO 40

https://files.constantcontact.com/45bb5db5401/f7de782a-2cf4-4243-8d74-43c76911226c.pdf?rdr=true

People v. Casper, 2025COA69

https://files.constantcontact.com/45bb5db5401/7c37efee-31b7-4c99-ac09-f0c4358b09e9.pdf?rdr=true

Peo v Murphy 24CA0097

https://files.constantcontact.com/45bb5db5401/612aa3e0-fedd-4d77-9c82-bd6f85587399.pdf?rdr=true

Peo in Interest of XXB 24CA0063

https://files.constantcontact.com/45bb5db5401/d5dbe0d2-6686-4764-83f1-c1cb56d66da9.pdf?rdr=true

United States v Spradley

https://files.constantcontact.com/45bb5db5401/7173a353-c5c4-427d-8e8c-04e0793686ef.docx?rdr=true

30 of 2025 Victory Newsletter

https://files.constantcontact.com/45bb5db5401/1c06663b-974f-49b5-a88f-62ce0de5fa58.pdf?rdr=true

PEP QR Code

https://files.constantcontact.com/45bb5db5401/8884d7d3-76d4-43ac-9376-290314764e1c.docx?rdr=true

Contact Shawndell Irving here: Shawndell Irving

Music by Scott Holmes. Used under a Creative Commons license. Download today's music at: http://freemusicarchive.org/

NOTE regarding unpublished Colorado Court of Appeals opinions: Please remember the Court of Appeals Policy states that the citation of unpublished opinions in the Court of Appeals is forbidden, with limited exceptions. Copies of unpublished opinions are provided for private use and are not to be included in an electronic database or otherwise published. Also, please note that you are free to cite unpublished cases in the district court for whatever persuasive value the judge may give them. Patterson v. James, 2018 COA 173, ¶¶ 40-43. You may request unpublished cases from the COA at http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Court_Of_Appeals/Opinion_Request.cfm