People v. Robertson
| Decision Date | 02 September 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 75--088,75--088 |
| Citation | 36 Colo.App. 367,543 P.2d 533 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Andre ROBERTSON, Defendant-Appellant. . III |
| Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Jean E. Dubofsky, Deputy Atty. Gen., Edward G. Donovan, Sol. Gen., E. Ronald Beeks, Asst. Atty. Gen., for plaintiff-appellee.
Rollie R. Rogers, Colorado State Public Defender, Mary G. Allen, Deputy State Public Defender, for defendant-appellant.
Defendant, a prisoner in the state penitentiary, was convicted of 'introducing contraband in the first degree' in violation of § 18--8--203(1)(b), C.R.S.1973. In this appeal, he contends that the court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the affirmative defense of 'choice of evils' as defined by § 18--1--702(1), C.R.S.1973. While we agree that under certain circumstances such defense may well be available to one so charged, nevertheless we hold that the defense is not appropriate under the specific facts of this case. Thus, the court's refusal to instruct on the defense was not error, and we affirm the conviction.
Defendant testified at his trial that he left his cell about 8 a.m. on March 22, 1974, after having locked the door. When he returned to the cell later that day, the door was open and his mattress distrubed. He also testified that he looked under his mattress and discovered an implement referred to in the record as a knife. He denied that he had ever seen it before, or that he knew how it came to be in his cell. He placed the knife in the waistband of his trousers and left the cell with the avowed intention of throwing it away. Shortly after leaving his cell, he encountered several officers who were conducting a routine shakedown search. One officer searched the defendant and found the knife, resulting in the filing of the introduction of contraband charges.
Defendant testified that he did not openly turn in the knife because of fear of retaliation from other inmates. He stated that such an act of cooperation with the jail authorities could lead to his acquiring a 'snitch jacket' which in turn would have placed his life in danger. This testimony was partially corroborated by that of a correction officer.
The 'choice of evils' defense, which has its roots in the common law doctrine of necessity, has long been recognized in criminal law under the latter description. See, e.g., 21 Am.Jur.2d Criminal Law § 99. This defense has been codified in Colorado by § 18--1--702, C.R.S.1973, which provides that:
'(C)onduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when it is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. McKnight
...the defendant no reasonable alternative other than the violation for which he is charged. People v. Handy, supra; People v. Robertson, 36 Colo.App. 367, 543 P.2d 533 (1975). In addition, where the charge is escape, the defendant must also show that the escape was committed without violence,......
-
People v. Tremaine D. Speer
...see also People v. Preciado–Flores, 66 P.3d 155, 163 (Colo.App.2002) (fear must be “well-grounded”); cf. People v. Robertson, 36 Colo.App. 367, 369, 543 P.2d 533, 535 (1975). The statute retains an objective standard of reasonableness, exculpating only for threats that a reasonable person w......
-
United States v. Best
...than by a jury. With the preface that the statute is a codification of the common law, Judge Sternberg said in People v. Robertson (1975) 36 Colo.App. 367, 543 P.2d 533: "For this defense to be available here, it must first be shown that defendant's conduct was necessitated by a specific an......
-
People v. Pautler, No. 00PDJ016.
...terms does not apply outside the criminal law setting. Cf. People v. Strock, 623 P.2d 42, 44 (Colo.1981); People v. Robertson, 36 Colo. App. 367, 543 P.2d 533, 534 (Colo.App.1975). Moreover, the Colorado Supreme Court has previously addressed the issue of justification as a defense to profe......
-
Choice of Evils in Colorado
...clients in many cases. NOTES __________ Footnotes: 1. CRS § 18-1-702. 2. People v. Strock, 623 P.2d 42 (Colo. 1981); People v. Robertson, 543 P.2d 533 (Colo.App. 1975). 3. Robertson, supra, note 2 at 535; People v. Handy, 603 P.2d 941 (Colo. 1979). 4. Aldrich v. Wright, 16 Am.Rep. 339, 344 ......
-
Opinions
...its own terms does not apply outside the criminal law setting. Cf. People v. Strock, 623 P.2d 42, 44 (Colo. 1981); People v. Robertson, 36 Colo. App. 367, P.2d 533, 534 (Colo. App. 1975). Moreover, the Colorado Supreme Court has previously addressed the issue of justification as a defense t......