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

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-8-110 (2026)

Mental incompetency to proceed - effect - how and when raised

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

(Repealed) Source: L. 72: R&RE, p. 229, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 39-8-110. L. 76: (2)(c) amended, p. 530, § 1, effective April 9. L. 83: (1) amended, p. 675, § 6, effective July 1. L. 87: (2)(c) amended, p. 1170, § 7, effective March 13. L. 95: (1) amended, p. 76, § 10, effective July 1. L. 2001: (3) added, p. 407, § 3, effective April 19. L. 2008: Entire section repealed, p. 1855, § 8, effective July 1.

Editor's note: In 2008, this section was relocated to § 16-8.5-102.

Cross references: For the legislative declaration contained in the 2008 act repealing this section, see section 1 of chapter 389, Session Laws of Colorado 2008.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37 cases, 1976–2020 · leading case: People v. MacK, 638 P.2d 257 (Colo. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. MacK, 638 P.2d 257 (Colo. 1981). · cites it 14× “The defendant questions the constitutionality of this statutory exception but we decline to address it in this case.”
People v. Palmer, 31 P.3d 863 (Colo. 2001). · cites it 10× “Relevance of Amnesia on Competency Determination Under section 16-8-110(1)(b), 6 C.R.S. (2000), "No person shall be tried, sentenced, or executed if such person is incompetent to proceed at that stage of the proceedings against him or her.”
Jones v. Dist. Court in & for Twenty-first Jud. Dist., 617 P.2d 803 (Colo. 1980). · cites it 9× “Section 16-8-110(2), C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl.”
People v. Chavez, 629 P.2d 1040 (Colo. 1981). · cites it 5× “R.S.1973 (1978 Repl. Vol. 8), sets forth the test of incompetency: “ ‘Incompetent to proceed’ means the defendant is suffering from a mental disease or defect which renders him incapable of understanding the nature and course of the proceedings against him or of participating or…”
People v. Morino, 743 P.2d 49 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 8× “” The issue may be raised either by the prosecution or by the defense prior to the commencement of any proceeding, and may be raised after the commencement of such a proceeding, if it is demonstrated that the defendant’s mental condition was not previously known or apparent.”
Cappelli v. Honorable Demlow, 935 P.2d 57 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 15× “Section 16-8-110, C.R.S. (1986 Repl-Vol. 8A) states, in pertinent part: (1).”
People v. Wingfield, 411 P.3d 869 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 9× “Thus, we conclude that the trial court did not follow the procedures set forth in former sections 16-8-110 and - 111 in this respect.”
People v. Zapotocky, 869 P.2d 1234 (Colo. 1994). · cites it 2× “A person is incompetent to proceed when he “is suffering from a mental disease or defect which renders him incapable of understanding the nature and course of the proceedings against him or of participating or assisting in his defense or cooperating with his defense counsel.”
People v. Harris, 914 P.2d 425 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 4× “See § 16-8-110(1), C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8A) (“no person shall be tried, sentenced, or executed if he is incompetent to proceed at that stage of the proceedings against him”).”
People v. Stephenson, 165 P.3d 860 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “" Section 16-8-110(2)(a), C.R.S.2006; see also People v.”
People v. Kilgore, 992 P.2d 661 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 4× “Section 16-8-110(2)(a), C.R.S.1998, requires the court to suspend any criminal proceeding whenever it “has reason to believe that the defendant is incompetent.”
Gray v. Dist. Court of the Eleventh Jud. Dist., 884 P.2d 286 (Colo. 1994). · cites it 4× “5, or raising the question of incompetency to proceed pursuant to section 16-8-110 waives any claim of confidentiality or privilege as to communications made by him to a physician or psychologist in the course of an examination or treatment for such mental condition for the…”
Show all 37 citing cases →
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-8-110(1): 5 cases
People v. MacK, 638 P.2d 257 (Colo. 1981). “The defendant questions the constitutionality of this statutory exception but we decline to address it in this case.”
People v. Zapotocky, 869 P.2d 1234 (Colo. 1994). “A person is incompetent to proceed when he “is suffering from a mental disease or defect which renders him incapable of understanding the nature and course of the proceedings against him or of participating or assisting in his defense or cooperating with his defense counsel.”
People v. Harris, 914 P.2d 425 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995). “See § 16-8-110(1), C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8A) (“no person shall be tried, sentenced, or executed if he is incompetent to proceed at that stage of the proceedings against him”).”
Coolbroth v. Dist. Court of the Seventeenth Jud. Dist. ex rel. Cnty. of Adams, 766 P.2d 670 (Colo. 1988).
Coolbroth v. Dist. Court of 17th Jud. D., 766 P.2d 670 (Colo. 1988).
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-8-110(1)(a): 1 case
Hendricks v. People, 10 P.3d 1231 (Colo. 2000).
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-8-110(1)(b): 2 cases
People v. Palmer, 31 P.3d 863 (Colo. 2001). “Relevance of Amnesia on Competency Determination Under section 16-8-110(1)(b), 6 C.R.S. (2000), "No person shall be tried, sentenced, or executed if such person is incompetent to proceed at that stage of the proceedings against him or her.”
People v. Corichi, 18 P.3d 807 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000).
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-8-110(2): 5 cases
Jones v. Dist. Court in & for Twenty-first Jud. Dist., 617 P.2d 803 (Colo. 1980). “Section 16-8-110(2), C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl.”
People v. Palmer, 31 P.3d 863 (Colo. 2001). “Relevance of Amnesia on Competency Determination Under section 16-8-110(1)(b), 6 C.R.S. (2000), "No person shall be tried, sentenced, or executed if such person is incompetent to proceed at that stage of the proceedings against him or her.”
People v. Chavez, 629 P.2d 1040 (Colo. 1981). “R.S.1973 (1978 Repl. Vol. 8), sets forth the test of incompetency: “ ‘Incompetent to proceed’ means the defendant is suffering from a mental disease or defect which renders him incapable of understanding the nature and course of the proceedings against him or of participating or…”
In re the People ex rel. W.P., 295 P.3d 514 (Colo. 2013).
Cordova v. People, 817 P.2d 66 (Colo. 1991).
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-8-110(2)(a): 15 cases
People v. Morino, 743 P.2d 49 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987). “” The issue may be raised either by the prosecution or by the defense prior to the commencement of any proceeding, and may be raised after the commencement of such a proceeding, if it is demonstrated that the defendant’s mental condition was not previously known or apparent.”
People v. Wingfield, 411 P.3d 869 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014). “Thus, we conclude that the trial court did not follow the procedures set forth in former sections 16-8-110 and - 111 in this respect.”
People v. MacK, 638 P.2d 257 (Colo. 1981). “The defendant questions the constitutionality of this statutory exception but we decline to address it in this case.”
People v. Stephenson, 165 P.3d 860 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007). “" Section 16-8-110(2)(a), C.R.S.2006; see also People v.”
People v. Kilgore, 992 P.2d 661 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999). “Section 16-8-110(2)(a), C.R.S.1998, requires the court to suspend any criminal proceeding whenever it “has reason to believe that the defendant is incompetent.”
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-8-110(2)(b): 6 cases
People v. Chavez, 629 P.2d 1040 (Colo. 1981). “R.S.1973 (1978 Repl. Vol. 8), sets forth the test of incompetency: “ ‘Incompetent to proceed’ means the defendant is suffering from a mental disease or defect which renders him incapable of understanding the nature and course of the proceedings against him or of participating or…”
People v. MacK, 638 P.2d 257 (Colo. 1981). “The defendant questions the constitutionality of this statutory exception but we decline to address it in this case.”
Jones v. Dist. Court in & for Twenty-first Jud. Dist., 617 P.2d 803 (Colo. 1980). “Section 16-8-110(2), C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl.”
People v. Morino, 743 P.2d 49 (Colo. Ct. App. 1987). “” The issue may be raised either by the prosecution or by the defense prior to the commencement of any proceeding, and may be raised after the commencement of such a proceeding, if it is demonstrated that the defendant’s mental condition was not previously known or apparent.”
People v. Palmer, 31 P.3d 863 (Colo. 2001). “Relevance of Amnesia on Competency Determination Under section 16-8-110(1)(b), 6 C.R.S. (2000), "No person shall be tried, sentenced, or executed if such person is incompetent to proceed at that stage of the proceedings against him or her.”
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.