Peo v. Craig, 23CA1176

Erik Shane Craig pleaded guilty to charges of sexual assault, obscenity, and child abuse in exchange for the dismissal of thirty-three other related charges involving alleged sexual assaults on multiple children.
Craig's plea agreement stipulated specific sentences, including 12 years to life for sexual assault, a consecutive 2-year term for obscenity, and a concurrent 1-year jail term for child abuse.
As part of the agreement, Craig acknowledged his status as a previously convicted sex offender and habitual felon, and agreed to register as a sex offender.
At sentencing, the district court heard statements from victims connected to both Craig's 2010 conviction and the current case.
The court found Craig to be a serial sex offender and imposed sentences within the plea agreement parameters.
Craig appealed, arguing that the court improperly relied on statements related to his 2010 conviction when determining his sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court erred by considering statements from a prior victim in sentencing Craig	The court can consider prior conduct and victim statements during sentencing	Consideration of prior victim’s statements violated due process and was an abuse of discretion	No error; consideration of such statements is permissible under Colorado law

Lopez v. People, 113 P.3d 713 (Colo. 2005) (outlines standard of review for sentencing decisions)
People v. Tallwhiteman, 124 P.3d 827 (Colo. App. 2005) (sentencing court may consider prior uncharged or dismissed conduct, so long as it is not materially untrue)
People v. Leske, 957 P.2d 1030 (Colo. 1998) (aggravating or mitigating factors can include past conduct and prior convictions)
Vensor v. People, 151 P.3d 1274 (Colo. 2007) (court may consider unrelated criminal conduct at sentencing)
Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (U.S. 1998) (prior crimes are typical sentencing factors)