Friday, November 22, 2013

Frontier Refining Company v. Kunkel’s, Inc. case brief

Frontier Refining Company v. Kunkel’s, Inc. case brief summary
407 P.2d 39 (1965)

Defendant sought review of a judgment of the District Court, Eleventh Judicial District (Colorado), which convicted him of felonious escape.

Defendant was sentenced on two separate convictions of burglary, and was sentenced in the state penitentiary for three to five years on one conviction, and for two to five years on the other. The two sentences were to run consecutively. Defendant escaped, was found the next day, and was convicted of felonious escape. He was sentenced to a three to five year term in the penitentiary to run consecutively with his previous sentences.


  • On appeal, the court affirmed. 
  • The court held that an action provided for under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 39-18-4(2) (1953) and Colo. Rev. Stat. § 105-4-6 (1953) did not constitute punishment for the substantive crime interdicted by Colo. Rev. Stat. § 40-7-53 (1963), but was rather an administrative disciplinary sanction imposed on a prisoner for breaking the rules of the prison. 
  • Double jeopardy for the same crime was not involved. 
  • The jury was justified in finding that defendant's identify was proved, as he offered no evidence to contradict the prosecution's case.
  • Further, the proof of both convictions had materiality under the circumstances of the case, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the evidence.

The court affirmed the judgment of the trial court.

Recommended Supplements for Corporations and Business Associations Law

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Ins and Outs of Class Action Lawsuits: A Comprehensive Guide

Sometimes, you may buy a product only to find it defective. To make it worse, your search for the product reveals mass complaints. You can ...