Quick answer: A Denver Rule 35(c) lawyer helps you challenge a Colorado criminal conviction or sentence after the case is over by filing a post-conviction motion. They identify legal errors like ineffective assistance of counsel, an unconstitutional plea, newly discovered evidence, or sentencing mistakes, then gather records, draft the motion, and argue for relief such as a new trial, a new sentencing hearing, or withdrawal of a plea.
What to Bring and the First 30 Days of Work
What you should bring (or gather): your case number, mittimus/judgment of conviction, plea agreement and advisement forms (if any), sentencing orders, any appellate briefs/opinions, probation/parole paperwork, copies of police reports or discovery you still have, and a timeline of key events (arrest, offers, plea dates, trial dates, sentencing). Also bring names and contact info for witnesses, prior lawyers, and anyone who has relevant texts, emails, or records.
Week 1–2: a lawyer typically requests the full court file, orders transcripts (plea colloquy, trial, sentencing, key motions hearings), and collects prior counsel’s file if available. They do issue-spotting against the record—looking for claims that are legally allowed in post-conviction and supported by something concrete—and start identifying what proof is missing (for example, an affidavit from you about the advice you received, or records showing what an uncalled witness would have said).
Month 1: the focus usually shifts to building admissible support. That can include drafting affidavits (you, witnesses, experts when appropriate), tracking down documents (phone records, medical/mental health records if relevant, immigration advice issues, lab reports), and outlining the motion so each claim has (1) specific facts, (2) the legal standard, and (3) the requested remedy. A Denver rule 35c lawyer also flags early if something belongs in a different vehicle (like a direct appeal issue) so you don’t spend time and money chasing the wrong path.
What Rule 35(c) Covers and How It Differs From a Direct Appeal
A direct appeal usually argues legal errors based on the existing trial-court record—things like rulings on motions, jury instructions, or whether the evidence was legally sufficient. Rule 35(c) is a post-conviction process that often relies on facts outside the original record, such as what advice counsel gave, what investigation was (or wasn’t) done, or evidence that wasn’t reasonably discoverable at the time.
Procedural bars matter. Claims can be limited if an issue was already raised and decided on appeal, or if the court concludes it could have been raised earlier but wasn’t. Lawyers analyze this by matching each proposed claim to the procedural history and the transcripts to decide what is still open, what needs a cause-and-prejudice style explanation (when available), and what is likely to be rejected as repetitive or waived.
Common Grounds People Raise in 35(c) Motions
The most common claim is ineffective assistance of counsel. That can include failing to investigate key evidence, missing a viable suppression issue, giving incorrect advice about a plea, not communicating a plea offer, or not preparing for trial in a way that falls below professional norms. The motion also has to connect the mistake to a realistic outcome change—such as a reasonable chance you would not have pled guilty, or that the result at trial or sentencing would likely have been different.
Other grounds can include a plea that wasn’t knowing and voluntary, constitutional violations (like due process problems), newly discovered evidence that could not reasonably have been found earlier, juror misconduct, or sentencing errors (including improper enhancements or incorrect calculation issues). A lawyer helps pick the strongest claims and avoid weaker ones that can distract from the core argument.
Timing, Procedure, and What Gets Denied on the Papers
Time limits can apply and can vary based on the case type, conviction date, and the kind of relief being requested. Readers should confirm any deadline questions directly with counsel and by checking the current Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure (including Rule 35) and any applicable Colorado statutes, because missing a filing window can end the case before it starts.
Judges sometimes deny 35(c) motions without a hearing when the filing doesn’t present specific, supported facts. Common examples include: conclusory allegations with no affidavits or identified witnesses; failing to explain “prejudice” (what would have changed and why); and claims that are flatly refuted by the record—often the plea colloquy transcript where the court asked about promises, threats, understanding of rights, or satisfaction with counsel. A lawyer’s job is to draft around these problems by tying each claim to the record and adding the missing proof.
After filing, the prosecution can respond, and the judge may deny the motion on the papers or set an evidentiary hearing. If a hearing is granted, it can take months to schedule, and the court will usually focus on a few disputed facts rather than re-trying the whole case. Possible outcomes include a new sentencing hearing, permission to withdraw a plea, a new trial, or denial with the option to appeal.
If you want a clear plan for evaluating and presenting a Rule 35(c) motion in Denver, DeChant Law is a place to get help.