Martinez v. People, 2015 CO 16

Victim Daniel Medina was shot multiple times outside the home of his ex-wife; he was dragged into the street and shot fatally by co-defendant Tapia with the householder's revolver.
Joe Martinez lived with the householder, was at the scene, allegedly assisted in reloading, taunted the victim, helped drag him, then fled in the getaway car (which Martinez drove); police recovered bullets/cartridges linking the revolver to the killing.
Martinez was charged with first-degree murder after deliberation under a complicity theory (the co-defendant fired the fatal shot).
At trial, the court gave two jury instructions on "after deliberation": Instruction 11 mirrored the statutory definition (appreciable reflection), but Instruction 12 used the older Van Houten language that deliberation may be satisfied by an interval "sufficient for one thought to follow another."
Defense counsel objected to Instruction 12 as cumulative/unnecessary but conceded the Van Houten language stated the law; the objection did not invoke Key or argue the instruction was legally incorrect, so the issue was not preserved.
On appeal the court of appeals reviewed for plain error, found overwhelming evidence of deliberation and that instructions read together did not mislead, and affirmed; the Colorado Supreme Court granted certiorari and affirmed the court of appeals.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (People)	Defendant's Argument (Martinez)	Held
Whether giving the Van Houten instruction on "after deliberation" was reversible constitutional error	Instructional error harmless because proper statutory instruction was also given and evidence of deliberation was overwhelming	Instruction 12 misstated the law (conflicted with Key) and lessened the prosecution's burden; reversible error	Court: Error not preserved; plain error applies; no plain error — overwhelming evidence plus correct Instruction 11 cured risk of prejudice
Whether evidence was sufficient to convict Martinez as a complicitor of first-degree murder after deliberation	Evidence (reloading, taunting, dragging, control of gun/getaway car, sequence of shots) supports finding of deliberation and intent to facilitate murder	Presence alone is insufficient; prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence and co-defendant fired the fatal shot	Court: Evidence sufficient — reasonable jury could find Martinez had deliberative culpability and assisted with intent to facilitate the murder

Key v. People, 715 P.2d 319 (Colo. 1986) (holds Van Houten instruction constitutionally deficient; harmless-error analysis when objection preserved)
Van Houten v. People, 43 P. 137 (Colo. 1895) (original source of "one thought to follow another" language regarding premeditation)
People v. Sneed, 514 P.2d 776 (Colo. 1973) (rejects Van Houten's minimal-time formulation for deliberation)
People v. Miller, 113 P.3d 743 (Colo. 2005) (explains preservation vs. plain-error review for constitutional instruction errors)