Norman v. People, Nos. 22627

Docket Nº23306
Citation178 Colo. 190, 496 P.2d 1029
Case DateApril 24, 1972
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

Page 1029

496 P.2d 1029
178 Colo. 190
George I. NORMAN, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs in Error,
v.
PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Defendant in Error.
Nos. 22627, 23306.
Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.
April 24, 1972.

[178 Colo. 192] Morrato, Gueck & Colantuno, James J. Morrato, Edward H. Sherman, Denver, for plaintiffs in error.

Duke W. Dunbar, Atty. Gen., John P. Moore, Deputy Atty. Gen., George E. DeRoos, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for defendant in error.

JACK F. SEAVY, District Judge. *

This matter first came here under No. 22627. We remanded it to the trial court for consideration of a motion for relief on the ground of newly discovered evidence. The trial court denied this motion and that denial is before us in proceeding No. 23306. We ordered the two writs of error consolidated.

The defendants were convicted of false pretenses and conspiracy. The attorney general concedes that the evidence was not sufficient to convict the defendant Helgeson on false pretenses. We agree. We reverse the convictions and remand the case for a new trial as to all the defendants on the charge of conspiracy, and as to defendants Norman and Swanson on the charge of false pretenses.

The amended information contained six counts, as follows:

Count 1--conspiracy to commit confidence game.

Count 2--confidence game.

Count 3--false pretenses.

Page 1030

Count 4--false pretenses (of which the defendants were convicted).

Count 5--conspiracy to commit false pretenses.

Count 6--conspiracy to commit false pretenses (of which the defendants were convicted).

[178 Colo. 193] Immediately after the jury was selected the court required the district attorney to elect between certain counts and as a result of such election, Counts 3 and 5 were dismissed. At the conclusion of the People's case, the court entered judgments of acquittal as to Counts 1 and 2.

The original information contained Counts 1 and 2. Eight months after the filing of the original information and on the day prior to the trial date the court granted a motion of the district attorney to amend the information and added Counts 3, 4, 5 and 6. Defendants requested a continuance and time to file motions directed against the new counts. A continuance was granted, but only for one week, and the request for time to file motions was denied.

Count 2 charged the defendants and others with a confidence game allegedly occurring on September 8, 1965. The alleged victims were members of the Fossum family and the Fossum Foundation, Inc. The factual situation giving rise to such charge involved the sale by defendants and purchase by the victims of certain real property located in Jefferson County and described at the trial as Troutdale in the Pines. The victims intended to purchase the property to be used to establish a religion-oriented college. The allegation is that the defalcations of the defendants resulted in the victims' being defrauded of approximately $65,000. The greater part of the evidence presented at trial concerned this transaction.

Count 4 charged the defendants with false pretenses, the alleged offense occurring on August 13, 1965. The facts giving rise to such charge involved the sale of a radio station known as KICM. It is alleged that the Fossum family and the Fossum Foundation were defrauded of $10,000, which was supposedly needed by defendants to effectuate the transfer to the purchasers of the license to operate the station.

It is apparent from the summary of the allegations set out in Counts 3 and 4 that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • People v. Thatcher, No. 79SA390
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • December 21, 1981
    ...that this exception includes notes or worksheets intended to guide the prosecutor in his examination of witnesses. Norman v. People, 178 Colo. 190, 496 P.2d 1029 (1972); Rapue v. People, 171 Colo. 324, 466 P.2d 925 (1970). However, notes are discoverable if they are in substance recitals of......
  • People v. District Court of El Paso County, No. 89SA132
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • April 23, 1990
    ...because they are prepared in anticipation of litigation. 2 W. LaFave & J. Israel, Criminal Procedure 497-98 (1984); see Norman v. People, 178 Colo. 190, 195, 496 P.2d 1029, 1031 (1972); Rapue v. People, 171 Colo. 324, 328, 466 P.2d 925, 927 (1970); Hopper v. People, 152 Colo. 405, 411, 382 ......
  • People v. Warner, No. 90SC13
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • December 10, 1990
    ...as defined in section 18-4-401(1) essentially replaced the former crime of obtaining goods by false pretenses. 1 See Norman v. People, 178 Colo. 190, 194, 496 P.2d 1029, 1031 (1972); C. Torcia, Wharton's Criminal Law § 448, at 515 Interpreting Colorado's current "theft by deception" provisi......
  • People v. Washington, 19CA1332
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • June 9, 2022
    ...the drug charges together. ¶ 3 We hold as a matter of first impression that People v. Novotny, 2014 CO 18, overruled Norman v. People, 178 Colo. 190, 496 P.2d 1029 (1972), to the extent Norman held joinder error requires automatic reversal. Instead, we hold that misjoinder under Crim. P. 8(......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • People v. Thatcher, No. 79SA390
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • December 21, 1981
    ...that this exception includes notes or worksheets intended to guide the prosecutor in his examination of witnesses. Norman v. People, 178 Colo. 190, 496 P.2d 1029 (1972); Rapue v. People, 171 Colo. 324, 466 P.2d 925 (1970). However, notes are discoverable if they are in substance recitals of......
  • People v. District Court of El Paso County, No. 89SA132
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • April 23, 1990
    ...because they are prepared in anticipation of litigation. 2 W. LaFave & J. Israel, Criminal Procedure 497-98 (1984); see Norman v. People, 178 Colo. 190, 195, 496 P.2d 1029, 1031 (1972); Rapue v. People, 171 Colo. 324, 328, 466 P.2d 925, 927 (1970); Hopper v. People, 152 Colo. 405, 411, 382 ......
  • People v. Warner, No. 90SC13
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • December 10, 1990
    ...as defined in section 18-4-401(1) essentially replaced the former crime of obtaining goods by false pretenses. 1 See Norman v. People, 178 Colo. 190, 194, 496 P.2d 1029, 1031 (1972); C. Torcia, Wharton's Criminal Law § 448, at 515 Interpreting Colorado's current "theft by deception" provisi......
  • People v. Washington, 19CA1332
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • June 9, 2022
    ...the drug charges together. ¶ 3 We hold as a matter of first impression that People v. Novotny, 2014 CO 18, overruled Norman v. People, 178 Colo. 190, 496 P.2d 1029 (1972), to the extent Norman held joinder error requires automatic reversal. Instead, we hold that misjoinder under Crim. P. 8(......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT