People v. Gagnon, 83CA0975
| Decision Date | 18 April 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 83CA0975,83CA0975 |
| Citation | 703 P.2d 661 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeffrey Robert GAGNON, Defendant-Appellant. . II |
| Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H. Forman, Sol. Gen., Dolores S. Atencio, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.
David F. Vela, Colorado State Public Defender, Thomas M. Van Cleave, III, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, for defendant-appellant.
Defendant, Jeffrey Robert Gagnon, appeals from a judgment of conviction entered on jury verdicts finding him guilty of two counts of felony menacing. We reverse and remand for a new trial.
The incident from which the charges arose began as a series of verbal confrontations between the occupants of two motor vehicles. Ultimately, both vehicles stopped and the passengers alighted, meeting in the middle of the street. A fight ensued between defendant in the one car and two passengers from the other vehicle. During the course of the fight, John Demarest II was allegedly stabbed by defendant.
Prior to trial, the district attorney filed a motion in limine to preclude the defense from introducing, for impeachment purposes, evidence of Demarest's two recent felony drug convictions. As grounds for the motion, the district attorney argued that Demarest had yet to file his motions for new trial and that, therefore, the convictions were not final pursuant to § 13-90-101, C.R.S., and could not be used for impeachment purposes. See People v. Johnson, 192 Colo. 483, 560 P.2d 465 (1977); People v. Baca, 44 Colo.App. 167, 610 P.2d 1083 (1980).
At the hearing, and in light of these authorities, defendant asked for a continuance until such time as the motions for new trial had been filed and ruled upon. The trial court denied defendant's motion for a continuance and granted the district attorney's motion in limine, thus precluding any reference to Demarest's convictions. Defendant asserts that these rulings of the trial court constituted error. We agree.
The granting or denial of a motion for a continuance is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial court, and, absent an abuse of that discretion, the court's ruling will not be disturbed. People v. Billington, 191 Colo. 323, 552 P.2d 500 (1976). However, such an abuse will be found if the defendant suffers substantial prejudice as a result of a denial of the continuance. See People v. Holcomb, 187 Colo. 371, 532 P.2d 45 (1975); People v. McCabe, 37 Colo.App. 181, 546 P.2d 1289 (1975). Here, the defendant has sustained his burden of demonstrating substantial prejudice.
There is no question but that evidence of a witness' prior felony convictions can be used on cross-examination for impeachment purposes. People v. Taylor, 197 Colo. 161, 591 P.2d 1017 (1979); § 13-90-101, C.R.S.
The crime of which defendant was convicted here was felony menacing. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Sauser
...court deprived him of "an opportunity to develop evidence that would have all but assured his acquittal," citing to People v. Gagnon , 703 P.2d 661 (Colo. App. 1985), and People v. McCabe , 37 Colo. App. 181, 546 P.2d 1289 (1975). We are not persuaded.¶ 18 Both Gagnon and McCabe involved re......
-
Derosier v. Balltrip
...12 at ¶ 20. Ms. Brown, to whom the comment was made, told the officers that she was “not scared.” Id. at ¶ 21; see People v. Gagnon , 703 P.2d 661, 663 (Colo.App.1985) (“[W]hat the victim saw or heard, and his reactions thereto, are relevant considerations in determining whether defendant h......
-
People v. Manzanares, 94CA2125
...are relevant considerations in determining whether defendant had the requisite intent to place the victim in fear. People v. Gagnon, 703 P.2d 661 (Colo.App.1985). When ruling on a motion for judgment of acquittal, the trial court determines whether the evidence, when viewed as a whole and i......
-
People v. French
...will not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. People v. Rodriguez, 914 P.2d 230, 268 (Colo.1996); People v. Gagnon, 703 P.2d 661, 663 (Colo.App.1985). "To say that a court has discretion in resolving [an] issue means that it has the power to choose between two or more cour......
-
ARTICLE 3
...thereto, are relevant considerations in determining whether the defendant had the requisite intent to place him in fear. People v. Gagnon, 703 P.2d 661 (Colo. App. 1985). Rather, it is only necessary that the defendant be aware that his conduct is practically certain to cause fear. People v......
-
ARTICLE 3 OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON
...thereto, are relevant considerations in determining whether the defendant had the requisite intent to place him in fear. People v. Gagnon, 703 P.2d 661 (Colo. App. 1985). Rather, it is only necessary that the defendant be aware that his conduct is practically certain to cause fear. People v......