Cases | People v. Proctor, 570 P.2d 540 (Colo. 1977) | 2018
The witness observed a “ruckus” and was listed as a potential witness on a summons and complaint pending against defendant. The witness testified that defendant stated that he would be “taken care of” if he appeared in court. Defendant was convicted of intimidating a witness under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-8-604(a) (repealed). On appeal, defendant claimed that: (1) subsection (c) was intended to address inducing a person not to appear, while subsection (a) was intended to address only deceptive testimony; and (2) withholding testimony could not be unlawful because the witness was not subpoenaed at the time of contact. The supreme court held that: (1) defendant’s actions came within the plain language of subsection (a). It was clear that he attempted to influence a person to withhold testimony and it was not a mitigating factor that his goal was the withholding of all testimony, not just portions thereof; and (2) all that is necessary to complete the crime to presently attempt, by threat of harm or injury, to influence someone to withhold testimony at a future time. It was clear that “unlawfully” referred to the time when the testimony was actually withheld, not to the time of the contact.
(This case cites former Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-8-604.)