(1) At the first appearance of the probationer in court
or at the commencement of the hearing, whichever is first in time, the court shall advise the
probationer as provided in section 16-7-207 insofar as such matters are applicable; except that
there is no right to a trial by jury in proceedings for revocation of probation.
(2) At or prior to the commencement of the hearing, the court shall advise the
probationer of the charges against him and the possible penalties therefor and shall require the
probationer to plead guilty or not guilty.
(3) At the hearing, the prosecution has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of
the evidence the violation of a condition of probation; except that the commission of a criminal
offense must be established beyond a reasonable doubt unless the probationer has been convicted
thereof in a criminal proceeding. When, in a revocation hearing, the alleged violation of a
condition is the probationer's failure to pay court-ordered compensation to appointed counsel,
probation fees, court costs, restitution, or reparations, evidence of the failure to pay shall
constitute prima facie evidence of a violation. The court may, when it appears that the alleged
violation of conditions of probation consists of an offense with which the probationer is charged
in a criminal proceeding then pending, continue the probation revocation hearing until the
termination of the criminal proceeding. Any evidence having probative value shall be received
regardless of its admissibility under the exclusionary rules of evidence if the defendant is
accorded a fair opportunity to rebut hearsay evidence.
(4) If the probationer is in custody, the hearing shall be held within fourteen days after
the filing of the complaint, unless delay or continuance is granted by the court at the instance or
request of the probationer or for other good cause found by the court justifying further delay.
(5) If the court determines that a violation of a condition of probation has been
committed, it shall, within seven days after the said hearing, either revoke or continue the
probation. If probation is revoked, the court may then impose any sentence or grant any
probation pursuant to the provisions of this part 2 which might originally have been imposed or
granted.
Source: L. 72: R&RE, p. 245, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 39-11-206. L. 83: (3) amended, p.
664, § 5, effective July 1. L. 2012: (4) and (5) amended, (SB 12-175), ch. 208, p. 855, § 87,
effective July 1. L. 2017: (1) amended, (SB 17-294), ch. 264, p. 1392, § 34, effective May 25.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
110
cases (
13 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case:
Finney v. People, 325 P.3d 1044 (Colo. 2014).
Finney v. People, 325 P.3d 1044 (Colo. 2014).
· cites it 53× “T1 Section 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2018), requires a court to advise a probationer, at or before the commencement of a hearing on a revocation complaint, of the possible penal *1047 ties he may face.”
People v. Loveall, 231 P.3d 408 (Colo. 2010).
· cites it 32× “See § 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2009). In Colorado, the prosecution can admit hearsay evidence at a revocation hearing provided "the defendant is accorded a fair opportunity to rebut hearsay evidence.”
Villanueva v. People, 199 P.3d 1228 (Colo. 2009).
· cites it 30× “Section 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2008), expressly permits a revoked probationer to be sentenced to any sentence "which might originally have been imposed," but no more.”
People v. Smith, 183 P.3d 726 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 15× “2d 408 (2004), and section 16-11-206, C.R.S.2007, and also constituted an abuse of the court's discretion; (2) his constitutional right to speedy trial was violated; (8) his statutory right to speedy trial was violated; (4) he is entitled to a hearing on the amount of…”
Romero v. People, 179 P.3d 984 (Colo. 2007).
· cites it 20× “§ 16-11-206(3). The probationer’s due process guarantees include a written notice of the claimed violations of probation, disclosure to the probationer of the evidence against him, an opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documen-taiy evidence, the right…”
v. People, 2020 CO 3 (Colo. 2020).
· cites it 9× “¶27 Thus, we conclude that the legislative history supports an interpretation that (1) DUI probation under section 42-4-1307 is intended to operate differently than general criminal probation under section 16-11-206, and (2) the maximum period of incarceration a defendant may…”
v. People, 2019 CO 101 (Colo. 2019).
· cites it 7× “(2019), probation revocation hearings, § 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2019), and due process protections for defendants ordered to pay restitution, § 18-1.”
People v. Heimann, 186 P.3d 77 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 12× “The procedure for the probation revocation hearing is set forth at section 16-11-206, C.R.S.2007. Defendant claims he is entitled to reinstatement of probation because the February 16, 2006, hearing at which he was sentenced to prison occurred more than five days after he…”
People v. Finney, 328 P.3d 205 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 16× “1 84 It is also significant that section 16-11-206 was enacted after Crim.”
People v. Fransua, 2016 COA 79 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “4 Section 135-1-108 was codified at section 2-4-108 in the 1973 codification of the Colorado Revised Statutes and section 16-11-206 was codified at section 18-1.”
People v. Nance, 221 P.3d 428 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 16× “Section 16-11-206(5), C.R.S8.2009, provides, as relevant here, that if a court revokes probation, it "may then impose any sentence or grant any probation pursuant to the provisions of this part 2 which might originally have been imposed or granted.”
People v. Banark, 155 P.3d 609 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 3× “Section 16-11-206(1), C.R.S.2006; see Byrd v.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-206(1) — 9 cases
Villanueva v. People, 199 P.3d 1228 (Colo. 2009).
“Section 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2008), expressly permits a revoked probationer to be sentenced to any sentence "which might originally have been imposed," but no more.”
Finney v. People, 325 P.3d 1044 (Colo. 2014).
“T1 Section 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2018), requires a court to advise a probationer, at or before the commencement of a hearing on a revocation complaint, of the possible penal *1047 ties he may face.”
People v. Banark, 155 P.3d 609 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
“Section 16-11-206(1), C.R.S.2006; see Byrd v.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-206(2) — 5 cases
Finney v. People, 325 P.3d 1044 (Colo. 2014).
“T1 Section 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2018), requires a court to advise a probationer, at or before the commencement of a hearing on a revocation complaint, of the possible penal *1047 ties he may face.”
People v. Finney, 328 P.3d 205 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012).
“1 84 It is also significant that section 16-11-206 was enacted after Crim.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-206(3) — 44 cases
People v. Loveall, 231 P.3d 408 (Colo. 2010).
“See § 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2009). In Colorado, the prosecution can admit hearsay evidence at a revocation hearing provided "the defendant is accorded a fair opportunity to rebut hearsay evidence.”
v. People, 2019 CO 101 (Colo. 2019).
“(2019), probation revocation hearings, § 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2019), and due process protections for defendants ordered to pay restitution, § 18-1.”
Villanueva v. People, 199 P.3d 1228 (Colo. 2009).
“Section 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2008), expressly permits a revoked probationer to be sentenced to any sentence "which might originally have been imposed," but no more.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-206(4) — 7 cases
People v. Smith, 183 P.3d 726 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008).
“2d 408 (2004), and section 16-11-206, C.R.S.2007, and also constituted an abuse of the court's discretion; (2) his constitutional right to speedy trial was violated; (8) his statutory right to speedy trial was violated; (4) he is entitled to a hearing on the amount of…”
People v. Heimann, 186 P.3d 77 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
“The procedure for the probation revocation hearing is set forth at section 16-11-206, C.R.S.2007. Defendant claims he is entitled to reinstatement of probation because the February 16, 2006, hearing at which he was sentenced to prison occurred more than five days after he…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-206(5) — 46 cases
Romero v. People, 179 P.3d 984 (Colo. 2007).
“§ 16-11-206(3). The probationer’s due process guarantees include a written notice of the claimed violations of probation, disclosure to the probationer of the evidence against him, an opportunity to be heard in person and to present witnesses and documen-taiy evidence, the right…”
v. People, 2020 CO 3 (Colo. 2020).
“¶27 Thus, we conclude that the legislative history supports an interpretation that (1) DUI probation under section 42-4-1307 is intended to operate differently than general criminal probation under section 16-11-206, and (2) the maximum period of incarceration a defendant may…”
Villanueva v. People, 199 P.3d 1228 (Colo. 2009).
“Section 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2008), expressly permits a revoked probationer to be sentenced to any sentence "which might originally have been imposed," but no more.”
People v. Heimann, 186 P.3d 77 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
“The procedure for the probation revocation hearing is set forth at section 16-11-206, C.R.S.2007. Defendant claims he is entitled to reinstatement of probation because the February 16, 2006, hearing at which he was sentenced to prison occurred more than five days after he…”
People v. Smith, 183 P.3d 726 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008).
“2d 408 (2004), and section 16-11-206, C.R.S.2007, and also constituted an abuse of the court's discretion; (2) his constitutional right to speedy trial was violated; (8) his statutory right to speedy trial was violated; (4) he is entitled to a hearing on the amount of…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-206(6) — 1 case
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-206(8) — 6 cases
People v. Loveall, 231 P.3d 408 (Colo. 2010).
“See § 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2009). In Colorado, the prosecution can admit hearsay evidence at a revocation hearing provided "the defendant is accorded a fair opportunity to rebut hearsay evidence.”
Villanueva v. People, 199 P.3d 1228 (Colo. 2009).
“Section 16-11-206, C.R.S. (2008), expressly permits a revoked probationer to be sentenced to any sentence "which might originally have been imposed," but no more.”
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.