Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 16
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-8-104.5 (2026)

Single trial of issues

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) The issues raised by the plea of not guilty by reason of insanity shall be treated as an affirmative defense and shall be tried at the same proceeding and before the same trier of fact as the charges to which not guilty by reason of insanity is offered as a defense.

(2) This section shall apply to offenses committed on or after July 1, 1995.

Source: L. 96: Entire section added, p. 3, § 1, effective January 31.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1997–2015 · leading case: People v. Marko, 2015 COA 139 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Marko, 2015 COA 139 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “” § 16-8-104.5, C.R.S. 2015. ¶192        “The procedures governing the insanity defense cannot be applied in a manner that destroys the constitutional safeguard against self-incrimination.”
People v. Herrera, 87 P.3d 240 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 5× “Section 16-8-104.5(1), C.R.S.2003, provides for a unitary trial procedure: The issues raised by the plea of not guilty by reason of insanity shall be treated as an affirmative defense and shall be tried at the same proceeding and before the same trier of fact as the charges to…”
People v. Welsh, 80 P.3d 296 (Colo. 2003). · cites it 2× “§ 16-8-104.5(1), 6 C.R.S. (2003). Consequently, the prosecution presented its case regarding the defendant's sanity in anticipation of the defense's proffered evidence on the issue.”
People v. Grenier, 200 P.3d 1062 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 5× “Section 16-8-104.5, C.R.S.2007, the Unitary Trial Procedure Statute, protects a defendant's privilege against self-incrimination through section 16-8-107, which states in pertinent part: , (1)(a) .”
People v. Tally, 7 P.3d 172 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “Pursuant to § 16-8-104.5, C.R.S.1998, a unitary trial before the same jury was held to determine both defendant's substantive guilt and the issue of his sanity.”
People v. Bielecki, 964 P.2d 598 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “Among the provisions which were enacted at that time, and which *602 defendant asserts should not have been applied in his case, were §16-8-104.5, C.R.S. 1997 (requiring a single trial on sanity and guilt) and §16-8-105.”
People v. Hill, 934 P.2d 821 (Colo. 1997). · cites it 2× “Section 16-8-104.5, 8A C.R.S. (1996 Supp.”
People v. Laeke, 280 P.3d 1 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “§ 16-8-104.5(1), C.R.S. 2009 ("The issues raised by the plea of not guilty by reason of insanity shall be treated as an affirmative defense and shall be tried at the same proceeding and before the same trier of fact as the charges to which not guilty by reason of insanity is…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-8-104.5(1) — 4 cases
People v. Herrera, 87 P.3d 240 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003). “Section 16-8-104.5(1), C.R.S.2003, provides for a unitary trial procedure: The issues raised by the plea of not guilty by reason of insanity shall be treated as an affirmative defense and shall be tried at the same proceeding and before the same trier of fact as the charges to…”
People v. Welsh, 80 P.3d 296 (Colo. 2003). “§ 16-8-104.5(1), 6 C.R.S. (2003). Consequently, the prosecution presented its case regarding the defendant's sanity in anticipation of the defense's proffered evidence on the issue.”
People v. Grenier, 200 P.3d 1062 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). “Section 16-8-104.5, C.R.S.2007, the Unitary Trial Procedure Statute, protects a defendant's privilege against self-incrimination through section 16-8-107, which states in pertinent part: , (1)(a) .”
People v. Laeke, 280 P.3d 1 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009). “§ 16-8-104.5(1), C.R.S. 2009 ("The issues raised by the plea of not guilty by reason of insanity shall be treated as an affirmative defense and shall be tried at the same proceeding and before the same trier of fact as the charges to which not guilty by reason of insanity is…”
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.