People v. Clerkin

Colorado Court of Appeals

People v. Clerkin

638 P.2d 808, 1981 Colo. App. LEXIS 904

CourtColorado Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 20, 1981

DocketNo. 80CA0877

StatusPublished

This text of 638 P.2d 808 (People v. Clerkin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Colorado Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Clerkin, 638 P.2d 808, 1981 Colo. App. LEXIS 904 (Colo. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

KELLY, Judge.

The defendant, Patrick Edwin Clerkin, was charged with assault in the second degree, resisting arrest, and criminal mischief. The defendant moved to dismiss pursuant to the provisions of § 18-1-408(2), C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl.Vol. 8). The trial court dismissed count 3, the charge of criminal mischief, but denied the motion as to the remaining counts. The defendant thereupon prosecuted this appeal.

During oral argument of the case, the court inquired whether counts 1 and 2 of the information are still pending and remain to be tried. Upon receiving an affirmative answer from both counsel, and after consultation, the court dismissed the appeal because there is no final judgment. This opinion elaborates the reasons therefor.

The defendant relies on the authority of County Court v. Ruth, 194 Colo. 352, 575 P.2d 1 (1977). That case is not dispositive of the issue, because it arises in a different procedural context. In Ruth, the accused was charged in county court and sought review in district court pursuant to C.R.C.P. 106. Accordingly, the action in district court was civil in nature, see also Thomas v. County Court, 198 Colo. 87, 596 P.2d 768 (1979), the judgment of the district court therein was final, and the appeal was properly pursued in this court. Here, the criminal prosecution was initiated in district court, and there is no final judgment.

Since this court is without jurisdiction to hear original writs, see C.A.R. 21, the appeal is dismissed.

VAN CISE and TURSI, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

KELLY, Judge.

The defendant, Patrick Edwin Clerkin, was charged with assault in the second degree, resisting arrest, and criminal mischief. The defendant moved to dismiss pursuant to the provisions of § 18-1-408(2), C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl.Vol. 8). The trial court dismissed count 3, the charge of criminal mischief, but denied the motion as to the remaining counts. The defendant thereupon prosecuted this appeal.

During oral argument of the case, the court inquired whether counts 1 and 2 of the information are still pending and remain to be tried. Upon receiving an affirmative answer from both counsel, and after consultation, the court dismissed the appeal because there is no final judgment. This opinion elaborates the reasons therefor.

The defendant relies on the authority of County Court v. Ruth, 194 Colo. 352, 575 P.2d 1 (1977). That case is not dispositive of the issue, because it arises in a different procedural context. In Ruth, the accused was charged in county court and sought review in district court pursuant to C.R.C.P. 106. Accordingly, the action in district court was civil in nature, see also Thomas v. County Court, 198 Colo. 87, 596 P.2d 768 (1979), the judgment of the district court therein was final, and the appeal was properly pursued in this court. Here, the criminal prosecution was initiated in district court, and there is no final judgment.

Since this court is without jurisdiction to hear original writs, see C.A.R. 21, the appeal is dismissed.

VAN CISE and TURSI, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

638 P.2d 808, 1981 Colo. App. LEXIS 904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-clerkin-coloctapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack