Colorado Revised Statutes
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-7-101 (2026)
Separate trial of joint defendants
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
When two or more defendants are jointly indicted or informed against for any offense and there is material evidence, not relating to reputation, which is admissible against one or some of them but which is not admissible against all of them if they are tried separately and which is prejudicial to those against whom it is not admissible, those against whom such evidence is admissible shall be tried separately upon motion of any of those against whom the evidence is not admissible. In all other cases, defendants jointly prosecuted shall be tried separately or jointly in the discretion of the court.
Source: L. 72: R&RE, p. 220, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 39-7-101.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: People v. Maass, 981 P.2d 177 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998).
People v. Maass, 981 P.2d 177 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998). “14 and § 16-7-101, C.R.S.1998. Crim. P. 14 provides as follows: If it appears that a defendant or the prosecution is prejudiced by a joinder of offenses or of defendants in any indictment or information, or by such joinder for trial together, the court may order an election or…”
Peltz v. People, 728 P.2d 1271 (Colo. 1986). “§ 16-7-101, 8A C.R.S. (1986); Crim.P. 14; People v.”
People v. Horne, 619 P.2d 53 (Colo. 1980). “Where, as here, there is no showing that denial of a motion for severance prejudiced the defendant, the trial court’s ruling will not be disturbed on appeal. People v. Maestas, supra. III. Horne next asserts that a judgment of acquittal on the criminal trespass charge should…”
People v. Backus, 952 P.2d 846 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998). “Both defendant and Coit previously had moved for separate trials, see § 16-7-101, C.R.S.1997, and Crim. P. 14, but only Coit moved for a continuance.”
People v. Carrillo, 946 P.2d 544 (Colo. Ct. App. 1997). “Pursuant to § 16-7-101, C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8A), a defendant is entitled to a severance as a matter of right if there is material evidence admissible against one but not all of the defendants and admission of that evidence is prejudicial to the defendant against whom the…”
People v. Gonzales, 601 P.2d 1366 (Colo. 1979). “Section 16-7-101, C.R.S. 1973, however, offers more specific guidelines for the resolution of this issue, and provides: “When two or more defendants' are jointly indicted or informed against for any offense, and there is material evidence, not relating to reputation, which is…”
People v. Hernandez, 829 P.2d 392 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991). “Section 16-7-101, C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8A); Crim.”
People v. Johnson, 560 P.2d 465 (Colo. 1977). “See section 16-7-101, C.R.S. 1973; People v. Maestas, 183 Colo.”
People v. Montoya, 942 P.2d 1287 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). “1993); § 16-7-101, C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8A); Crim.”
People v. O'NEAL, 32 P.3d 533 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000). “Section 16-7-101, C.R.S.2000; Crim. P. 14; People v.”
People v. Gardenhire, 903 P.2d 1165 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995). “A criminal defendant is entitled to severance as a matter of right pursuant to § 16-7-101, C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8A) “if there is evidence which is admissible against one but not all of the parties and that evidence is prejudicial to the defendant against whom the evidence is…”
People v. Barela, 689 P.2d 689 (Colo. Ct. App. 1984). “[and] which is prejudicial to [the defendant as to whom it is not admissible]_” Section 16-7-101, C.R.S. (1978 Repl.Vol. 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.