Peo v. Thiam

• Court: Colorado Court of Appeals
• Decided: March 12, 2026
• Docket: 23CA0961
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

23CA0961 Peo v Thiam 03-12-2026

COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS

Court of Appeals No. 23CA0961 City and County of Denver District Court Nos. 18CR9162, 19CR4832 & 19CR8433 Honorable Ericka F.H. Englert, Judge

The People of the State of Colorado,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

Abou Thiam,

Defendant-Appellant.

ORDERS AFFIRMED

Division IV Opinion by JUDGE BROWN Schutz and Berger*, JJ., concur

NOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(e) Announced March 12, 2026

Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General, Patrick A. Withers, Assistant Solicitor General and Senior Assistant Attorney General, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff- Appellee

Megan A. Ring, Colorado State Public Defender, Daniel J. Sequeira, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, Colorado, for Defendant-Appellant

*Sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice under provisions of Colo. Const. art. VI, § 5(3), and § 24-51-1105, C.R.S. 2025. ¶1 Defendant, Abou Thiam, appeals the district court’s orders

revoking his probation in three cases. We affirm.

I. Analysis

¶2 This case is related to People v. Thiam, (Colo. App. No.

23CA0962, Mar. 12, 2026) (not published pursuant to C.A.R. 35(e))

(Thiam I), which we also announce today.

¶3 In 2019, Thiam pleaded guilty to criminal mischief in Denver

District Court Case No. 18CR9162 and to violation of a protection

order involving domestic violence in Denver District Court Case No.

19CR4832. In 2020, Thiam pleaded guilty to criminal possession of

a financial device in Denver District Court Case No. 19CR8433.

The district court sentenced Thiam to concurrent two-year

probationary sentences in each of these three cases.

¶4 In 2021, while Thiam was on probation, the prosecution

charged him with attempt to influence a public servant and two

counts of forgery in Denver District Court Case No. 21CR6328. As

a result of the new charges, Thiam’s probation officer filed separate

complaints to revoke Thiam’s probation in Case Nos. 18CR9162,

19CR4832, and 19CR8433. The complaints all alleged that Thiam

had violated the terms of his probation because he (1) had been

1 charged with new crimes; (2) tested positive for cocaine; (3) failed to

submit all required urinalyses; (4) was discharged from domestic

violence counseling as unsuccessful; (5) failed to report for

scheduled appointments; and (6) failed to pay court-ordered costs,

fees, and fines.

¶5 In 2023, a jury found Thiam guilty as charged in Case No.

21CR6328. The district court subsequently revoked Thiam’s

probation in Case Nos. 18CR9162, 19CR4832, and 19CR8433

because he had been convicted in Case No. 21CR6328.

¶6 Thiam appealed his conviction in Case No. 21CR6328, Thiam

I, slip op. at ¶ 1. And he separately appealed the revocation of his

probation in Case Nos. 18CR9162, 19CR4832, and 19CR8433 in

this appeal. Here, he argues that if his conviction in Case No.

21CR6328 is reversed, we should reverse the probation revocations

in Case Nos. 18CR9162, 19CR4832, and 19CR8433 and remand

the case for the district court to consider the alternative bases for

revocation alleged in the complaints. Because we affirm the

judgment of conviction in Case No. 21CR6328, Thiam I, slip op. at

¶ 56, we also affirm the court’s orders revoking Thiam’s probation.

2 II. Disposition

¶7 We affirm the district court’s orders.

JUDGE SCHUTZ and JUDGE BERGER concur.