Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Medina

Court of Appeals of Colorado, Second Division

July 3, 2019

The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Delano M. Medina, Defendant-Appellant.

          City and County of Denver District Court No. 15CR3728. Honorable Sheila A. Rappaport, Judge.

         COUNSEL:

         Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General, Brock J. Swanson, Assistant Attorney General, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

          Delano M. Medina, Pro se.

         FURMAN. JUDGE Dailey and Lipinsky, JJ., concur.

          OPINION

Page 518

          FURMAN, Judge.

          Opinion Modified On the Court's Own Motion

          [¶1] Defendant, Delano M. Medina, pleaded guilty to second degree assault and was sentenced to four years in the custody of the Department of Corrections. Medina then filed two motions asking the court to dismiss his conviction under the Uniform Mandatory Disposition of Detainers Act (UMDDA), sections 16-14-101 to -108, C.R.S. 2018.

Page 519

Medina's first motion was a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to C.R.C.P. 60(b)(4), and his second motion was a postconviction motion pursuant to Crim. P. 35(c) . The district court construed both motions as a petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Crim. P. 35(c) . The court then denied the motions.

          [¶2] On appeal, Medina contends that the district court lacked jurisdiction to accept his guilty plea and should have dismissed the case under section 16-14-104, C.R.S. 2018. His contention is based on the premise that he was not brought to trial within the statutorily required time period under the UMDDA. Because we disagree with Medina's contention, we affirm the district court's order.

          I. UMDDA

          [¶3] Medina contends that he made a valid request for final disposition in accordance with the requirements of the UMDDA, and that the district court did not have jurisdiction under section 16-14-104 to accept his guilty plea because ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.