People v. Czajkowski

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because the act of stealing automobile parts was more specific than the act of stealing generally, establishing a greater sanction for one crime than the other does not violate equal protection
• holding that the court could not state that the General Assembly had constitutionally erred in providing more severe penalties for an act which it believes to be of greater social consequence
• involving an equal protection challenge to section 42-5-104, C.R.S. 1973, which treats theft of automobile parts
• involving an equal protection challenge to section 42-5-104, C.R.S. 1973, which treats theft of automobile parts
• theft of auto parts more specific than theft generally; no violation of equal protection to give one greater sanction
• theft of auto parts deemed more specific than theft generally; no violation of equal protection to assess a greater sanction for the former

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).