Sanchez v. People, 325 P.3d 553

Sanchez challenged the court of appeals’ affirmation of a conviction for Sexual Assault on a Child-Pattern of Abuse following a jury verdict in a four-count action.
The information charged Sexual Assault on a Child and a separate Pattern of Abuse enhancement based on multiple incidents over years.
The jury found Not Guilty on the sole count titled Sexual Assault on a Child but returned a pattern-of-abuse verdict on a form listing six incidents.
The trial court entered judgment for a class 3 felony Sex Assault on a Child-Pattern of Abuse.
The verdict form required unanimous agreement to both guilt of Sexual Assault on a Child and the specific incidents for the pattern.
The Colorado Supreme Court held the pattern verdict did not unambiguously reflect a guilty finding on all elements, so the conviction was improper.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did the verdict unambiguously prove all elements of the offense and pattern?	Sanchez argues the verdict form and instructions failed to show a unanimous guilty finding on Sexual Assault on a Child and the pattern.	People contends the form and instructions sufficiently evidenced a joint charge and pattern finding.	No; the verdict form did not provide a unanimous finding of all elements.
Was the judgment for Sex Assault on a Child-Pattern of Abuse proper given the verdict form?	Sanchez argues the form did not clearly elect a distinct act to support the enhancer.	People argues the charge and instructions permitted a combined finding.	No; entry of judgment for a crime not supported by a unanimous verdict violated due process.
Does failure to give an elemental instruction for the pattern offense render the verdict invalid?	Sanchez maintains the jury was not instructed on the pattern offense as a standalone element.	People relies on Melillo to permit charging pattern with the offense.	Yes; lack of an explicit elemental instruction undermines verdict validity.
Should the conviction be reversed as structural error?	Unanimous verdict on the crime and enhancer not shown, constituting structural error.	Conviction should stand if evidence supports the pattern based on the forms.	Yes; reversal is required.

People v. Melillo, 25 P.3d 769 (Colo. 2001) (held that a single charging count could allege both crime and pattern enhancer when properly alleged)
Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275 (U.S. 1993) (requires unanimity beyond a reasonable doubt for offense elements)
Medina v. People, 163 P.3d 1136 (Colo. 2007) (due process/unanimity requirements for jury verdicts)
Rowe v. People, 856 P.2d 486 (Colo. 1993) (illustrates advisory role of jury interrogatories in verdicts)