explaining that a preliminary hearing “protects the accused by avoiding an embarrassing, costly and unnecessary trial” and “benefits the interests of judicial economy and efficiency”
How later courts described this case
- explaining that a preliminary hearing “protects the accused by avoiding an embarrassing, costly and unnecessary trial” and “benefits the interests of judicial economy and efficiency”
- holding Colorado’s bind-over hearing is “not a mini-trial” and that it does not focus on “consideration of the probability of conviction at the ensuing trial”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MR. JUSTICE GROVES
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. While I think the court should have ruled otherwise, I cannot say that it abused its discretion or committed reversible error. To do so makes this tribunal a trial court. Therefore, I cannot concur in the majority opinion.