Skip to content

Criminal LawHomicide

People v. Hall

Colorado Supreme Court · Decided April 10, 2000 · Core case

Full citation

People v. Hall, 999 P.2d 207 (Colo. 2000).

VerifiedQuotes, pinpoints and citation checked word for word against the opinion; facts checked against the opinion before publication. October 20, 2026.

The People of the State of Colorado

statepetitioner

Nathan Hall

skier charged with manslaughterrespondent

The parties: The People of the State of Colorado v. Nathan Hall.

Brief

Facts

On April 20, 1997, the last day of the ski season, Hall worked as a ski lift operator on Vail mountain. After his shift ended and the lifts closed, he skied down toward the base. The slopes were not crowded. On the lower part of a run called Riva Ridge, Hall skied very fast, straight down the fall line (straight down the slope without turning), with his ski tips in the air, his weight back on his skis and his arms out to his sides for balance. Moguls (bumps) bounced him around. He flew off a knoll, saw people below him, and could not stop or gain control because of the bumps. He collided with Cobb, who was traversing (crossing) the slope below him. Cobb suffered a single traumatic blow to the head that fractured the thickest part of his skull, and he died. Several witnesses said Hall was skiing too fast and was out of control. The coroner said the injury took a significant amount of force, and that speed was a very important part of that force. Hall had been a high school ski racer who was taught to ski safely and under control, and he worked for a ski area. His blood alcohol level was .009, and a drug test was negative. The People charged him with manslaughter, a class 4 felony.

Issues

  1. Did the People use an authorized procedure to appeal the county court's finding of no probable cause, first to the district court and then to the Colorado Supreme Court?
  2. To be a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death for reckless manslaughter, must death be more likely than not to result from the defendant's conduct?
  3. Viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, did the evidence at the preliminary hearing show probable cause that Hall recklessly caused Cobb's death?

Holding

A risk of death can be substantial even when death is less than fifty percent likely. Viewing the evidence in the prosecution's favor, a reasonably prudent and cautious person could entertain the belief that Hall consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death, so there was probable cause for reckless manslaughter and Hall must stand trial. The court did not decide guilt. The People's appeal was properly brought.

The rest of this brief is for subscribers

Every plan includes the procedural history, the rule and the reasoning, the IRAC and CREAC versions, every key quote with its pinpoint, the citation box with parallel citations and short forms and the exam angle.

Learn the citation form

Short video lessons on the rules behind this brief’s citations, each with two pause-and-practice exercises.

The Citation Code · citationcode.com/cases/people-v-hall