Every indictment or accusation of the grand
jury shall be deemed sufficient technically and correct which states the offense in the terms and
language of the statute defining it, including either conjunctive or disjunctive clauses, or so
plainly that the nature of the offense may be easily understood by the jury. Pleading in either the
conjunctive or the disjunctive shall place a defendant on notice that the prosecution may rely on
any or all of the alternatives alleged. The commencement of the indictment shall be in substance
as follows:
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of.................................................)
Of the ........ term of the ........ court, in the year ........ . The grand jurors chosen, selected,
and sworn, in and for the county of .........., in the name and by the authority of the people of the
state of Colorado, upon their oaths, present. (Here insert the offense, the name of the person
charged, and the time and place of committing the same, with reasonable certainty.) Every
indictment shall be signed by the foreman of the grand jury returning it and by the prosecuting
attorney, his or her assistant, or his or her deputy.
Source: L. 72: R&RE, p. 214, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 39-5-201. L. 2003: Entire section
amended, p. 972, § 1, effective April 17.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases, 1975–2020 · leading case:
People v. Zupancic, 557 P.2d 1195 (Colo. 1976).
People v. Zupancic, 557 P.2d 1195 (Colo. 1976).
· cites it 17× “1973, provides, in pertinent part: "Every indictment or accusation of the grand jury shall be deemed sufficient technically and correct which states the offense in the terms and language of the statute defining it, or so plainly that the nature of the offense may be easily…”
People v. Donachy, 586 P.2d 14 (Colo. 1978).
· cites it 6× “Moreover, reference to section 16-5-201, C.R.S. 1973, 6 or similarly worded Crim.”
People v. Valdez, 928 P.2d 1387 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 4× “Thus, the state grand jury, being properly impaneled, had jurisdiction to return its indictment. We note also that, because defendant has not alleged that the indictment is technically insufficient or unsound in form or substance, and we find no such insufficiency, the state…”
v. Viburg, 2020 COA 8 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 2× “7(a)(2); see also § 16-5-201, C.R.S. 2019. Similarly, an information is sufficient if “the offense charged is set forth with such degree of certainty that the court may pronounce 2 The Colorado Constitution also guarantees criminal defendants the right to trial by an impartial…”
People v. Thimmes, 643 P.2d 780 (Colo. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 3× “We agree. The General Assembly has required that the commencement of an indictment “shall be in substance” as set forth in a form prescribed by the General Assembly.”
People v. Maestas, 606 P.2d 849 (Colo. 1980).
· cites it 3× “We have reviewed the indictment form and conclude that it complies with the statute, section 16-5-201, C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl.”
People v. Moody, 674 P.2d 366 (Colo. 1984).
· cites it 2× “Sections 16-5-201 and -202, C.R.S.1973 (1978 Repl.”
People v. Westendorf, 542 P.2d 1300 (Colo. Ct. App. 1975).
· cites it 3× “Section 16-5-201, C.R.S.1973, provides: "Every indictment or accusation of the grand jury shall be deemed sufficient technically and correct which states the offense in the terms and language of the statute defining it, or so plainly that the nature of the offense may be easily…”
People v. MacRander, 828 P.2d 234 (Colo. 1992).
“§§ 16-5-201, -202, 8A C.R.S. (1986). The elected district attorney is authorized to appoint not only an assistant and chief deputy district attorney, §§ 20-1-201(2), -205, 8B C.”
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.