Court Opinion

ID: 9529328
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:49:49.134963+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:44.409595
License: Public Domain

*584JUDGE NEY,
dissenting.
I dissent because I believe the opinion of the majority is contrary to the holding of People v. Bridges, 662 P.2d 161 (Colo.1983).
People v. Bridges, supra, requires that the fact finding requirements in support of a sentence are applicable to a ruling on a Crim.P. 35(b) motion. Here, the record reveals no findings supporting the denial of defendant’s motion. I do not agree that this court should articulate the fact finding to support the denial of defendant’s motion. I would, therefore, set aside the trial court’s order denying defendant’s motion and remand to the trial court for findings and the entry of an appropriate order.