Court Opinion

ID: 9848018
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 04:11:25.412852+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:55.005938
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE LEE
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I respectfully dissent in part I.
I concurred in People v. Bridges, supra, for the reason that there was no evidence of asportation, an essential element of kidnapping as charged under section 18-3-301 (1)(a), C.R.S. 1973. By reason of this Bridges became only a first-degree sexual assault case under section 18-3-402, C.R.S. 1973.
In the present case, the evidence of asportation was overwhelming.
The jury was properly instructed as to the law of first-degree kidnapping, including the element of “concession.” By its verdict of. guilty, the jury found the element of concession to have been established beyond a reasonable doubt. There is ample evidence in the record from which this conclusion could be reached.
*8I would therefore affirm the judgment of conviction of first-degree kidnapping.