People v. Apodaca

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he habitual criminal sentencing statute has been interpreted as preempting any otherwise applicable sentencing statute that would result in a less severe sentence[.]”
• We read a statute as a whole “to give consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect to all its parts.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• People v. Villa
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2009-10-01· cited 861×
• People v. Lopez
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2015-04-23· cited 191×
• Gwinn v. Awmiller
  Tenth Circuit· 2004-01-12· cited 159×
• People v. Davis
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2008-12-24· cited 24×
• Peo v. Lowe
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2020-08-03· cited 11×
• People v. Morris
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2025-02-06· cited 3×

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Spoto
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1990-07-09· cited 1,098×
• Gimmy v. People
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1982-03-29· cited 694×
• Martin v. People
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 2001-06-25· cited 325×
• People v. Gholston
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2000-05-11· cited 194×
• Robles v. People
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1991-05-20· cited 67×
• People v. Nuanez
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1999-02-16· cited 24×
• People v. Duncan
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2001-03-01· cited 17×
• People v. Montgomery
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1987-05-26· cited 16×
• People v. Hoefer
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 1998-04-30· cited 14×
• People v. Smith
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2001-06-21· cited 9×
• People v. Pena
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 1990-02-01· cited 8×
• People v. Reyes
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 1986-06-19· cited 6×