The People of the State of Colorado v. Benjamin Eugene Davenport.
Court
Supreme Court of Colorado
Decided
June 3, 2025
Jurisdiction
S
Importance
54%
Practice Areas
Case Summary
<div data-spec-version="0.0.3dev" data-generated-on="2025-06-08"> <div class="generated-from-iceberg vlex-toc"> <link href="https://doc-stylesheets.vlex.com/ldml-xml.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"></link> <div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-header header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-refglobal="case:peopleofthestateofcoloradovdavenportno24sc625june3,2025" data-content-heading-label="Header"><p class="ldml-metadata"> 1 </p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"> <span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">The People of the State of Colorado</span>, <span class="ldml-role">Petitioner</span></span> </b><b class="ldml-bold"> v. </b><b class="ldml-bold"> <span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">Benjamin Eugene Davenport</span>. <span class="ldml-role">Respondent</span></span> </b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-cite"><b class="ldml-bold">No. 24SC625</b></span></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-court">Supreme Court of Colorado</span>, En Banc</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-date"><b class="ldml-bold">June 3, 2025</b></span></p></div> <div class="ldml-casehistory"><p data-paragraph-id="163" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="163" data-sentence-id="180" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">Court of Appeals</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_180" data-reftype="reporter"><span class="ldml-cite">Case No. 22CA2273</span></a></span></span> </p></div><div class="ldml-opinion content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Opinion"><p data-paragraph-id="221" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="221" data-sentence-id="237" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">Petition for Writ</span> of Certiorari DENIED.</span> </p></div></div></div> </div> </div>
Case Details
Case Details
Legal case information
Status
Decided
Date Decided
June 3, 2025
Jurisdiction
S
Court Type
federal
Legal Significance
Case importance metrics
Metadata
Additional information
Quick Actions
Case management tools
Case Summary
AI-generated comprehensive summary with legal analysis
Case Overview
Case Name: The People of the State of Colorado v. Benjamin Eugene Davenport
Citation: No. 24SC625
Court: Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc
Date: June 3, 2025
Jurisdiction: State of Colorado
This case involves a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by the People of the State of Colorado against Benjamin Eugene Davenport. The Supreme Court of Colorado reviewed the case following a decision from the Court of Appeals.
Key Legal Issues
- Writ of Certiorari: The primary legal issue was whether the Supreme Court should grant the petition for a writ of certiorari, allowing for further review of the lower court's decision.
- Appeal Process: The implications of the appellate process and the standards for granting certiorari were central to the court's analysis.
Court's Decision
The Supreme Court of Colorado DENIED the petition for a writ of certiorari. This decision indicates that the court found no substantial grounds to warrant further review of the lower court's ruling.
Legal Reasoning
In its decision, the court likely considered several factors, including:
- The sufficiency of the arguments presented by the petitioner.
- The relevance of the issues raised in the appeal to existing legal precedents.
- The potential impact of the case on broader legal principles or public policy.
The court's denial of certiorari suggests that it did not find any errors in the Court of Appeals' decision that warranted its intervention.
Key Holdings
- The petition for a writ of certiorari was DENIED.
- The ruling of the Court of Appeals stands as the final decision in this matter.
Precedents and Citations
While the specific precedents cited in this case are not detailed in the provided text, the following general legal principles are often relevant in certiorari cases:
- Standards for Certiorari: Courts typically look for significant legal questions or conflicts in the law before granting certiorari.
- Appellate Review Standards: The court may also consider whether the lower court's ruling was consistent with established legal standards.
Practical Implications
The denial of certiorari in this case reinforces the authority of the Court of Appeals' ruling and serves as a reminder of the high bar that must be met for the Supreme Court to intervene in appellate decisions. Legal practitioners should note:
- The importance of presenting compelling arguments when seeking certiorari.
- The implications of appellate decisions on future cases, particularly in similar legal contexts.
This case exemplifies the procedural dynamics of the appellate system and highlights the challenges faced by petitioners in seeking higher court review. Legal professionals should remain aware of the standards and practices surrounding writs of certiorari as they navigate similar cases in the future.
Legal Topics
Areas of law covered in this case
Case Information
Detailed case metadata and classifications
Court Proceedings
Document Details
Legal Classification
Similar Cases
Cases with similar legal principles and precedents
Case Details
Legal case information
Status
Decided
Date Decided
June 3, 2025
Jurisdiction
S
Court Type
federal
Legal Significance
Case importance metrics
Metadata
Additional information
Quick Actions
Case management tools