Editor’s Note: Law Week Colorado edits court opinion summaries for style and, when necessary, length.
Juan Ignacio Duran appealed the postconviction court’s order denying, without a hearing, his Crim. P. 35(c) motion alleging ineffective assistance of plea counsel and requested an extended proportionality review of his sentence. He claimed that his plea counsel provided ineffective assistance by incorrectly advising him about his parole eligibility and the 22-year sentence for his first-degree assault conviction is disproportionately harsh.
The Colorado Court of Appeals concluded that Duran’s claim that he would have gone to trial but for his plea counsel’s incorrect advice is conclusory and refuted by the record because the prosecution’s case against him was exceptionally strong, he faced the potential for a substantially longer prison sentence if convicted at trial and the record demonstrates that he was willing to accept the same parole eligibility date that he ultimately received.
The appeals court then performed its own abbreviated proportionality review and encountered an issue of first impression: Is extreme indifference first degree-assault, in violation of Section 18-3-201(1)(c) of the Colorado Revised Statutes, per se grave or serious under Wells-Yates v. People?
The appeals court concluded that it is per se grave or serious and that Duran’s sentence is not disproportionately harsh.
The appeals court affirmed the postconviction court’s order, albeit on different grounds.