Peo v. Podoba

── Peo v. Podoba ── Court: Colorado Court of Appeals Date: May 21, 2026 Category: General 23CA1702 Peo v Podoba 05-21-2026 COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 23CA1702 Boulder County District Court No. 22CR143 Honorable J. Keith Collins, Judge The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeremy Podoba, Defendant-Appellant. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED, ORDER REVERSED, AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS Division VII Opinion by JUDGE PAWAR Sullivan and Meirink, JJ., concur NOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(e) Announced May 21, 2026 Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General, Brian M. Lanni, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellee Megan A. Ring, Colorado State Public Defender, Lisa Weisz, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, Colorado, for Defendant-Appellant ¶1 Defendant, Jeremy Podoba, appeals his conviction of various offenses, including assault and witness tampering. He also appeals the restitution order. We affirm his convictions, reverse the restitution order, and remand with directions. I. Background ¶2 Podoba and his girlfriend, J.M., were involved in a series of verbal and physical altercations over a period of several months from January 2022 to May 2022. After the first altercation in January, during which Podoba choked J.M., a protection order issued that prohibited Podoba from having any contact with her. ¶3 Despite the protection order, J.M. and Podoba continued to see each other. And during a May incident, Podoba threw J.M. to the ground and broke her collarbone. ¶4 The prosecution filed various charges against Podoba based on these altercations. Less than two weeks before the scheduled trial (it was later continued), Podoba and J.M. had a direct message (DM) exchange during which Podoba wrote, “As long as you don’t go to court. Should be all good.” ¶5 Ultimately, Podoba was charged with five counts of second degree assault, five counts of violating a protection order, one count 1  of witness tampering for the DM, and various other counts. J.M. testified about the alleged assaults at trial and admitted to using physical force against Podoba on various occasions. The jury found Podoba guilty of two of the five assault counts (based on the January choking incident and the May broken collarbone incident), as well as all the non-assault counts. Podoba was convicted and sentenced accordingly, and the sentence included a restitution award. ¶6 Podoba appeals. He argues that (1) he was entitled to a self- defense instruction for one of the assault counts; (2) the evidence was insufficient to support the witness tampering conviction; (3) the court erred by admitting various testimony; (4) the prosecutor engaged in misconduct during closing argument; (5) there was cumulative error; and (6) the court improperly ordered restitution. We disagree with all his arguments except his challenge to the restitution order. II. Self-Defense Instruction ¶7 Podoba argues that the trial court erred by denying his request for a self-defense instruction for the assault count based on the collarbone incident. We disagree. 2 ¶8 A defendant is entitled to an affirmative self-defense instruction if he presents some credible evidence that he acted in self-defense. See § 18-1-407(1), C.R.S. 2025; Galvan v. People, 2020 CO 82, ¶ 24. As relevant here, a defendant acts in self- defense if he uses a reasonable degree of force to defend himself from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force. § 18-1-407(1). Therefore, Podoba was entitled to a self-defense instruction if there was any evidence that he reasonably believed he had to throw J.M. to t