Since 1989, Karen M. Gerash has been specializing in the area of appellate
advocacy. Her experience includes 
serving
the needs of indigent clients while working at the appellate division
with the Colorado State Public Defenders Office. Her extensive appellate
experience includes oral argument in both the Colorado Court of Appeals
and the Colorado State Supreme Court.
Ms. Gerash worked as a law clerk for the Honorable Charles Pierce and the Honorable Edwin Ruland on the Colorado State Court of Appeals. As a partner of Gerash, Toray & Gerash, P.C, she is currently working on several appeals for the firm.
Sampling
of Published Cases:
People v. Eppens, 979 P.2d 14 (Colo. 1999) (Supreme Court reversed a
successful challenge in the court of appeals to a conviction for sexual
assault on a child, finding there was no plain error form social worker
opining that child was sincere and that the prior consistent statements
of the child properly were admissible under CRE 801(d)(1)(B)).
Nguyen v. People, 900 P.2d 37 (Colo. 1995) (Supreme Court partially
affirmed a successful equal protection challenge to the second degree
assault statute. The statute subsequently was amended by the legislature).
People v. Frost, 5 P3d 317 (Colo. App. 1999) (certiorari denied as improvidently
granted, 33 P3d 555 (Colo. 2001) (Conviction for sexual assault on a
child reversed when the Court of Appeals agreed with the defense assertion
that the prior assault of the victim's cousin was not properly admissible
as other act evidence under CRE 404(b) and its admission was not harmless
error).
People v. Downing, 895 P2.d 1046 (Colo 1995) (successful challenge to
an increase in time given an inmate under 35(b) when transferred from
DOC to community corrections).
Zapotocky v. People, 869 P2d 1234 (Colo. 1994) (Supreme Court rejected
constitutional challenges, including due process and ex post facto)
to the competency statutes).
Gorman v. People, 19 P3d 662 (Colo. 2000) (Supreme Court rejected defense
assertions that, despite omission of the element "knowingly"
from the statute, the prosecution must prove that the defendant knew
the age of the child/minor to be found guilty of contributing to the
delinquency of a minor)
People v. Rivera, 2002 WL 31268890 (Colo. App. 2002) (Court reversed
a conviction for securities fraud because it found plain error resulted
from the failure to provide the jury with a unanimity instruction).
People
v. McCarty, 874 p2d 394 (Colo. 1994) (Supreme Court found no new evidentiary
hearing was required to resentence a defendant after revocation of probation).
Bar
Admissions:
