People v. Adams
2016 CO 74
| Colo. | 2016Background
- Curtis Adams, while serving a prison sentence for a prior felony, assaulted a correctional officer and was convicted of second-degree assault under § 18-3-203(1)(f).
- The assault statute (¶(f)) mandates that a sentence be served in the Department of Corrections and run consecutively to any other sentences (the “special” enhancement).
- The People also alleged an extraordinary aggravating circumstance under § 18-1.3-401(8)(a)(IV) — committing a felony while confined — which raises the term-of-years range to midpoint up to twice the presumptive maximum (the “general” enhancement).
- The trial court imposed an aggravated sentence of 12 years to run consecutively to Adams’s remaining sentences.
- The Colorado Court of Appeals vacated the sentence relying on People v. Willcoxon, reading People v. Andrews to limit application of the general enhancement where a special sentencing provision exists; the People appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the general sentencing enhancement (§ 18-1.3-401(8)(a)(IV)) may be applied together with the special consecutive-sentencing provision in § 18-3-203(1)(f) | Both statutes address different sentencing aspects (duration vs. order of service) and can be applied concurrently; trial court correctly imposed both | The special consecutive-sentencing provision precludes application of the general aggravator (relying on Andrews/Willcoxon) | Court held both enhancements apply; no irreconcilable conflict, so give effect to both |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Andrews, 871 P.2d 1199 (Colo. 1994) (held general confinement aggravator does not apply to escape crimes; decision limited to escape context)
- People v. Diaz, 347 P.3d 621 (Colo. 2015) (discusses legislative purpose in sentencing statutes)
- People v. Willcoxon, 80 P.3d 817 (Colo. App. 2002) (court of appeals held general aggravator did not apply to § 18-3-203(1)(f); overruled by this opinion)
- People v. Leske, 957 P.2d 1030 (Colo. 1998) (clarifies Andrews was limited to escape and not a broad rule precluding multiple sentencing provisions)
- People v. Chavez, 764 P.2d 356 (Colo. 1988) (treated confinement as aggravator for non-escape offenses)
- People v. Leonard, 755 P.2d 447 (Colo. 1988) (same as Chavez on confinement as aggravator)