In People v. Weeks 498 P. 142, 2021 CO 75, the court interpreted the restitution statute, 18-1.3-603, C.R.S. (2021). The court concluded that the restitution deadline may be extended only if, before the deadline expires, the court expressly finds good cause for doing so. It follows that neither a request for more time to determine the proposed amount of restitution nor an order granting such a request justifies extending the prosecution's deadline in subsection (2) or the court's deadline in subsection (1)(b).

The question presented is this: Should the fourth circuit ruling that Chittenden did not file a timely appeal apply since there has been an intervening change in the law recognizing an issue that was not previously available? Holland. 181 F. 3d 597, 605-06.

Should the fourth circuit ruling that Chittenden did not file a timely appeal apply given an intervening change in law?