Peo v. Gonzales

── Peo v. Gonzales ── Court: Colorado Court of Appeals Date: May 07, 2026 Category: General 24CA1099 Peo v Gonzales 05-07-2026 COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 24CA1099 Boulder County District Court No. 21CR2031 Honorable Monica Haenselman, Judge The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Hugo Gonzales, Defendant-Appellant. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED Division III Opinion by JUDGE MOULTRIE Dunn and Harris, JJ., concur NOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(e) Announced May 7, 2026 Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General, Leo T. Nguyen, Assistant Attorney General Fellow, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellee James West, Alternate Defense Counsel, Longmont, Colorado, for Defendant- Appellant ¶1 Defendant, Anthony Hugo Gonzales, appeals the judgment of conviction entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of two counts of second degree assault and one count each of first degree burglary and tampering with physical evidence. He contends that the district court reversibly erred by (1) giving the jury a deficient instruction on the concepts of the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof, and reasonable doubt; and (2) inaccurately instructing the jury on the theory of self-defense. We affirm. I. Background ¶2 Gonzales and the victim were inmates in the Boulder County Jail at the time of the underlying incident. Gonzales entered the victim’s cell, and a physical altercation ensued. As relevant to the charged offenses, the trial evidence revealed that Gonzales strangled the victim, broke his nose, and attempted to clean up the blood after the fight was over. The victim suffered significant injuries, while Gonzales sustained minor wounds. ¶3 The State charged Gonzales with first degree assault (strangulation), second degree assault (causing bodily injury), first degree burglary, and tampering with physical evidence. In addition to these charged offenses, the jury was also permitted to consider 1  second degree assault (strangulation), as a lesser included offense of first degree assault (strangulation), and third degree assault (reckless), as a lesser included offense of second degree assault (causing bodily injury). Gonzales endorsed the defenses of general denial and self-defense. ¶4 The jury found Gonzales guilty of the lesser included offense of second degree assault (strangulation) and otherwise convicted him as charged. The court sentenced Gonzales to an aggregate twenty-seven years in the custody of the Department of Corrections. II. Standard of Review ¶5 A court has a duty to instruct the jury on all matters of law applicable to the case. Roberts v. People, 2017 CO 76, ¶ 18. “As long as the instruction properly informs the jury of the law, a trial court has broad discretion to determine the form and style of jury instructions.” McDonald v. People, 2021 CO 64, ¶ 54 (quoting Day v. Johnson, 255 P.3d 1064, 1067 (Colo. 2011)). We review de novo the question of whether a court accurately instructed the jury on the law. Tibbels v. People, 2022 CO 1, ¶ 22. 2  III. Reasonable Doubt Jury Instruction ¶6 In 2022, the Colorado Model Criminal Jury Instruction defining the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof, and reasonable doubt was substantially revised to read as follows: Every person charged with a crime is presumed innocent. This presumption of innocence remains with the defendant throughout the trial and should be given effect by you unless, after considering all the evidence, you are convinced that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof in this case is upon the