Supreme Court of Colorado· 7/9/1990

People v. Spoto

Citations

795 P.2d 1314
14 Brief Times Rptr. 954
1990 Colo. LEXIS 499
1990 WL 93074

How courts have described this case

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

holding that absent a purpose for which the evidence might be relevant, a limiting instruction does “nothing to alleviate the risk” of the jury making the prohibited character inference
explaining that a trial court can reduce the probability of prejudice by carefully instructing the jury
concluding that a prior act where the defendant pulled a gun but did not use it does not rebut a claim of accidental shooting because the prior act \does not suggest that when [the defendant] pulls a gun he intends to use it\
noting that \[t]he accused written or oral statements may be evidence that the accused harbored such a plan\ (internal quotations omitted)
noting that “[t]he accused written or oral statements may be evidence that the accused harbored such a plan” (internal quotations omitted)
stating that prior bad acts are presumptively inadmissible unless prosecutor articulates logical relevance independent of the forbidden propensity inference

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Kirshbaum, Lohr, Rovira, That, Vollack, Yollack

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

159 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 People v. Spoto

5 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.