Colorado Court of Appeals· 4/26/2001

People v. James

Citations

40 P.3d 36
2001 Colo. J. C.A.R. 2141
2001 Colo. App. LEXIS 787
2001 WL 423086

How courts have described this case

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

indicating that it was only the term “individual” in the definition of enterprise that required further definition
making the distinction between the words \means\ and \includes\ in Colorado statutes
“Our review of the sealed information reveals that the information was not likely to have exculpated defendant or have provided impeaching material concerning prosecution witnesses.”
“Exculpatory evidence includes evidence that bears on the credibility of a witness the prosecution intends to call at trial.”
“[W]e decline to impose additional requirements for proof of the existence of an enterprise. These proposed requirements are beyond those mandated by the explicit language of our statute.”
declining to follow the interpretation of “enterprise” under RICO

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Casebolt, Plank, Jones

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

56 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this 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.