People v. Brooks

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the defendant was not required to register as a sex offender because his conviction in Texas did not fall within the statutory requirements of the applicable subsection under the Colorado sex offender registration statute
• \Our primary task in construing a statute is to give effect to the intent of the General Assembly by looking first at the language of the statute.\ (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re Stanley v. District Attorney for the 18th Judicial District
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2017-03-09· cited 3×
• People ex rel. I.S.
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2017-12-14· cited 1×
• Curtiss v. People
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2014-08-14

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Rodriguez
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1996-04-15· cited 1,618×
• People v. Dunaway
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 2004-04-12· cited 60×
• Fendley v. People
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2004-12-30· cited 18×
• Mayo v. People
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2008-03-06· cited 17×
• Fabiano v. Armstrong
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2006-01-26· cited 5×