Peo v. Frasier

── Peo v. Frasier ── Court: Colorado Court of Appeals Date: May 21, 2026 Category: General 23CA1502 Peo v Frasier 05-21-2026 COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 23CA1502 El Paso County District Court No. 17CR6128 Honorable Laura N. Findorff, Judge The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Corey Jammie Frasier a/k/a Corey Jammie Frazier, Defendant-Appellant. ORDER REVERSED AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS Division I Opinion by JUDGE FOX J. Jones and Dunn, JJ., concur NOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(e) Announced May 21, 2026 Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General, Brittany Limes Zehner, Senior Assistant Attorney General and Assistant Solicitor General, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellee Megan A. Ring, Colorado State Public Defender, Emma Berry, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, Colorado, for Defendant-Appellant ¶1 Defendant, Corey Jammie Frasier a/k/a Frazier,1 appeals the district court’s order revoking his deferred judgment and sentence (DJS) based on his failure to pay restitution. We reverse the court’s order and remand to the district court to reinstate the DJS. I. Background A. The DJS ¶2 In August 2017, Frazier was allegedly involved in the theft of marijuana products from a Colorado Springs marijuana dispensary at which he was a former employee. The prosecution charged Frazier with two counts each of second degree burglary and conspiracy to commit second degree burglary and one count of theft. On October 31, 2018, in a stipulated DJS, Frazier pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit second degree burglary and agreed to complete two years of probation and to comply with the terms of the DJS. If Frazier successfully completed the DJS, his guilty plea would be withdrawn and the case dismissed. Failure to comply with any of the DJS conditions would result in a judgment 1 Frazier’s name was incorrectly spelled with an s in the district court proceedings. 1  of conviction and sentence for the count to which Frazier pleaded guilty. B. The Restitution Order ¶3 The DJS also stated that Frazier would pay “[r]estitution in an amount to be determined within 91 days.” After accepting Frazier’s guilty plea, the district court set a sentencing hearing for November 14, 2018. At that hearing, defense counsel asked the court to impose the stipulated DJS “with the additional conditions that [Frazier] pay restitution, which I understand the District Attorney will submit in 91 days.” Later, Frazier said he had questions about restitution, and his attorney responded, “The court doesn’t have it. They’re . . . going to submit it in 91 days . . . and then you can have a hearing about it.” The district court confirmed that Frazier would have a chance to object and request a hearing. On November 30, 2018, the prosecution requested $54,825.75 in restitution. On December 11, Frazier’s counsel objected to the proposed amount based on lack of documentation and requested a hearing. Apparently at Frazier’s counsel’s request, a hearing was set for February 6, 2019. 2 ¶4 On February 1, 2019, Frazier’s counsel moved to continue the restitution hearing. On February 25, defense counsel withdrew, and substitute counsel entered an appearance. In April and June, defense counsel requested additional continuances. The prosecution also requested continuances in July and September 2019, and Frazier’s counsel did not object to either. The court held a restitution hearing in October 2019, but it set a second hearing in November 2019 to allow the victim to gather additional documentation. ¶5 After multiple uncontested continuances, the second hearing was