(Repealed) Source: L. 72: R&RE, p. 243, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 39-11-204. L. 73: p. 505, § 1. L. 77: (1) and (2)(e) amended, p. 863, § 5, effective July 1, 1979. L. 79: (2)(e.5) and (2.5) added, p. 601, § 26, effective July 1. L. 82: (2)(b) amended, p. 309, § 1, effective March 11; (2)(g) amended, p. 253, § 9, effective May 3. L. 87: (2)(e) amended, p. 563, § 9, effective July 1. L. 88: (2)(k.5) added, p. 708, § 4, effective July 1. L. 91: (1) amended, p. 437, § 2, effective May 29. L. 92: (1) amended, p. 455, § 2, effective June 2; (2)(d) and (2.5) amended, p. 211, § 13, effective August 1. L. 94: (2)(a)(VI.5) added and (2.5) amended, pp. 1811, 1812, §§ 3, 4, effective June 1; (1) amended, p. 2022, § 2, effective June 3; (2) amended, p. 2036, § 17, effective July 1. L. 95: (2)(a)(V) amended, p. 160, § 1, effective July 1; (2)(a)(V) amended, p. 742, § 7, effective July 1. L. 98: (2)(b)(II) amended, p. 1403, § 55, effective February 1, 1999. L. 99: (2.3) added, p. 61, § 4, effective July 1. L. 2000: (2)(a)(V) amended, p. 997, § 1, effective May 26; (2)(c) added, p. 234, § 3, effective July 1; (1) and (2.5) amended, p. 1045, § 8, effective September 1. L. 2001: (2)(d) added, p. 658, § 5, effective May 30; (4) amended, p. 32, § 1, effective August 8. L. 2002: (2)(c)(I) amended, p. 665, § 9, effective May 28; (2)(a)(V) amended, p. 979, § 2, effective July 1; (2)(d) amended, p. 1183, § 12, effective July 1; (2)(e) added, p. 1150, § 3, effective July 1; (2.5)(i.2), (2.5)(i.4), (2.5)(i.6), and (2.5)(i.8) added, p. 1156, § 17, effective July 1; entire section repealed, p. 1463, § 3, effective October 1.
Editor's note: (1) Senate Bill 02-018 amended subsection (2)(a)(V). House Bill 02-1229 amended subsection (2)(c)(I). Senate Bill 02-010 amended subsection (2)(d). Senate Bill 02-019 enacted subsections (2)(e), (2.5)(i.2), (2.5)(i.4), (2.5)(i.6), and (2.5)(i.8). This section as amended by Senate Bill 02-010, Senate Bill 02-018, Senate Bill 02-019, and House Bill 02-1229, was subsequently harmonized with House Bill 02-1046 and relocated to section 18-1.3-204.
(2) Subsection (2)(a)(V) was amended in Senate Bill 03-186, effective March 18, 2003. However, those amendments did not take effect due to the repeal of this section by House Bill 02-1046, effective October 1, 2002.
Cross references: For the legislative declaration contained in the 2002 act repealing this section, see section 1 of chapter 318, Session Laws of Colorado 2002.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
54
cases, 1976–2018 · leading case:
v. Barbre, 2018 COA 123 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
v. Barbre, 2018 COA 123 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 3× “1973 (A court “may” require that the defendant make restitution.); § 39-16-7, C.R.S. 1963 (same); § 39-16-7, C.”
Cumhuriyet v. People, 615 P.2d 724 (Colo. 1980).
· cites it 12× “The defendant accepted probation, but her timely objection to the restitution is included in the record of the probation hearing.”
People v. Rockwell, 125 P.3d 410 (Colo. 2006).
· cites it 12× “" § 16-11-204(1), C.R.S. (1994) [12] ; see People v.”
Romero v. People, 179 P.3d 984 (Colo. 2007).
· cites it 2× “1999) (noting that section 16-11-204(4), the identical predecessor of section 18-1.”
People v. Burleigh, 727 P.2d 873 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 15× “After taking into consideration the nature of defendant’s offense, his lack of a prior record, his age, the potential threat to the community, and promotion of deterrence as well as rehabilitation, the trial court imposed probation under § 16-11-204, C.R.S. (1978 Repl.Vol. 8),…”
People v. Moses, 64 P.3d 904 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 5× “2002, establishes as a mandatory condition of probation that “the defendant not commit another offense during the period for which the sentence remains subject to revocation” (emphasis added). That condition, although phrased differently, was imposed upon defendant as the first…”
People v. Ressin, 620 P.2d 717 (Colo. 1980).
· cites it 6× “Section 16-11-204(1), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Supp.”
People v. Deadmond, 683 P.2d 763 (Colo. 1984).
· cites it 2× “2d 724 (1980), we held that section 16-11-204(2)(e), 8 C.R.S. (1973), the then extant statute defining the conditions of probation, did not authorize an order requiring the payment of restitution as a condition of probation in the absence of evidence that asserted damages had…”
People v. Bishop, 7 P.3d 184 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 9× “See also § 16-11-204, C.R.S. 1998 (discussing conditions of probation).”
People v. Forsythe, 43 P.3d 652 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 7× “2000, In addition to a number of statutorily specified conditions, a court may require a defendant to "[slatisfy any other conditions reasonably related to the defendant's rehabilitation and the purposes of probation." Section 16-11-204(2)(a)(XV), C.R.8.”
People v. Knott, 83 P.3d 1147 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 4× “On August 15, 2001, the court issued a written order in which it concluded that §§ 16-11-204(4) & 17 — 27—105(l)(h) (now §§ 18-1.”
People v. Zimmerman, 616 P.2d 997 (Colo. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 7× “Defendant asserts that this failure constituted a violation of § 16-11-204(3), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(1) — 20 cases
v. Barbre, 2018 COA 123 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
“1973 (A court “may” require that the defendant make restitution.); § 39-16-7, C.R.S. 1963 (same); § 39-16-7, C.”
People v. Rockwell, 125 P.3d 410 (Colo. 2006).
“" § 16-11-204(1), C.R.S. (1994) [12] ; see People v.”
Cumhuriyet v. People, 615 P.2d 724 (Colo. 1980).
“The defendant accepted probation, but her timely objection to the restitution is included in the record of the probation hearing.”
People v. Ressin, 620 P.2d 717 (Colo. 1980).
“Section 16-11-204(1), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Supp.”
People v. Moses, 64 P.3d 904 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).
“2002, establishes as a mandatory condition of probation that “the defendant not commit another offense during the period for which the sentence remains subject to revocation” (emphasis added). That condition, although phrased differently, was imposed upon defendant as the first…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(2) — 11 cases
Cumhuriyet v. People, 615 P.2d 724 (Colo. 1980).
“The defendant accepted probation, but her timely objection to the restitution is included in the record of the probation hearing.”
People v. Burleigh, 727 P.2d 873 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986).
“After taking into consideration the nature of defendant’s offense, his lack of a prior record, his age, the potential threat to the community, and promotion of deterrence as well as rehabilitation, the trial court imposed probation under § 16-11-204, C.R.S. (1978 Repl.Vol. 8),…”
People v. Moses, 64 P.3d 904 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).
“2002, establishes as a mandatory condition of probation that “the defendant not commit another offense during the period for which the sentence remains subject to revocation” (emphasis added). That condition, although phrased differently, was imposed upon defendant as the first…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(2)(1) — 1 case
People v. Burleigh, 727 P.2d 873 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986).
“After taking into consideration the nature of defendant’s offense, his lack of a prior record, his age, the potential threat to the community, and promotion of deterrence as well as rehabilitation, the trial court imposed probation under § 16-11-204, C.R.S. (1978 Repl.Vol. 8),…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(2)(a)(II) — 1 case
People v. Rockwell, 125 P.3d 410 (Colo. 2006).
“" § 16-11-204(1), C.R.S. (1994) [12] ; see People v.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(2)(a)(XV) — 4 cases
People v. Forsythe, 43 P.3d 652 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).
“2000, In addition to a number of statutorily specified conditions, a court may require a defendant to "[slatisfy any other conditions reasonably related to the defendant's rehabilitation and the purposes of probation." Section 16-11-204(2)(a)(XV), C.R.8.”
People v. Bishop, 7 P.3d 184 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).
“See also § 16-11-204, C.R.S. 1998 (discussing conditions of probation).”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(2)(b) — 3 cases
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(2)(c) — 3 cases
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(2)(d) — 1 case
People v. Burleigh, 727 P.2d 873 (Colo. Ct. App. 1986).
“After taking into consideration the nature of defendant’s offense, his lack of a prior record, his age, the potential threat to the community, and promotion of deterrence as well as rehabilitation, the trial court imposed probation under § 16-11-204, C.R.S. (1978 Repl.Vol. 8),…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(2)(e) — 4 cases
v. Barbre, 2018 COA 123 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
“1973 (A court “may” require that the defendant make restitution.); § 39-16-7, C.R.S. 1963 (same); § 39-16-7, C.”
People v. Deadmond, 683 P.2d 763 (Colo. 1984).
“2d 724 (1980), we held that section 16-11-204(2)(e), 8 C.R.S. (1973), the then extant statute defining the conditions of probation, did not authorize an order requiring the payment of restitution as a condition of probation in the absence of evidence that asserted damages had…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(3) — 3 cases
People v. Zimmerman, 616 P.2d 997 (Colo. Ct. App. 1980).
“Defendant asserts that this failure constituted a violation of § 16-11-204(3), C.R.S. 1973 (1979 Cum.Supp.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-204(4) — 12 cases
Romero v. People, 179 P.3d 984 (Colo. 2007).
“1999) (noting that section 16-11-204(4), the identical predecessor of section 18-1.”
People v. Knott, 83 P.3d 1147 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003).
“On August 15, 2001, the court issued a written order in which it concluded that §§ 16-11-204(4) & 17 — 27—105(l)(h) (now §§ 18-1.”
People v. Forsythe, 43 P.3d 652 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001).
“2000, In addition to a number of statutorily specified conditions, a court may require a defendant to "[slatisfy any other conditions reasonably related to the defendant's rehabilitation and the purposes of probation." Section 16-11-204(2)(a)(XV), C.R.8.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.