Supreme Court of Colorado· 4/20/1987

Massey v. People

Citations

736 P.2d 19
1987 Colo. LEXIS 528

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

noting that the defendant was sentenced on March 5, 1984, and filed a Rule 35(a) motion thirty-two days later on April 6, 1984
“A ‘substantial nexus’ ... means that the defendant would have remained confined ... in the absence of any other charge.”
“A ‘substantial nexus’ . . . means that the defendant would have remained confined . . . in the absence of any other charge.”
“A ‘substantial nexus’ ... means that the defendant would have remained confined in the same judicial district on the charge for which credit is sought in the absence of any other charge.”
“The defendant has not proven, and the record does not establish, that the Pitkin County charges prevented the defendant’s release from the Mesa County jail or contributed to his confinement outside of Pit-kin County.”
“The defendant has not proven, and the record does not establish, that the Pitkin County charges prevented the defendant’s release from the Mesa County jail or contributed to his confinement outside of Pitkin County.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Erickson, Lohr, Dubofsky

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Massey v. People

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.