(1) An eligible person may apply at any time to the district court in the district where the conviction was secured for DNA testing concerning the conviction and sentence.
(2) A motion filed pursuant to this section shall include specific facts sufficient to support a prima facie showing that post-conviction relief is warranted under the criteria set forth in section 18-1-413. The motion shall include the results of all prior DNA tests, regardless of whether a test was performed by the defense or the prosecution.
(3) If the motion, files, and record of the case show to the satisfaction of the court that the petitioner is not entitled to relief based on the criteria specified in section 18-1-413, the court shall deny the motion without a hearing and without appointment of counsel.
(4) If the court does not deny the petitioner's motion for testing, the court shall appoint counsel if the court determines the petitioner is indigent and has requested counsel. The court shall forward a copy of the motion for DNA testing to the district attorney.
(5) Counsel for the defendant may request the court to set the matter for a hearing, if, upon investigation of the petitioner's motion for testing, counsel believes sufficient grounds exist to support an order for DNA testing. If the petitioner represents himself or herself, the court may set the matter for a hearing upon his or her request.
(6) Following a request for a hearing, the court shall allow the district attorney a reasonable amount of time, but not less than thirty-five days, to respond to the motion and any supplement filed by the petitioner's counsel and to prepare for the hearing.
(7) A court shall not order DNA testing without a hearing, except upon written stipulation of the district attorney.
(8) The court shall deny a motion for production of transcripts unless the petitioner makes a prima facie showing that a transcript will be necessary at a hearing conducted pursuant to this section.
(9) Upon motion of the defendant or the defendant's counsel, the court shall order a database search by a law enforcement agency in both national and local databases if the court determines that a reasonable probability exists that the database search will produce exculpatory or mitigating evidence relevant to a claim of wrongful conviction or sentencing. DNA profiles must meet current national DNA database index system eligibility standards and conform to current federal bureau of investigation quality assurance standards in order to be eligible for search against the state index system.
Source: L. 2003: Entire section added, p. 816, § 1, effective August 6. L. 2009: (9) added, (SB 09-241), ch. 295, p. 1582, § 11, effective July 1. L. 2012: (6) amended, (SB 12-175), ch. 208, p. 862, § 103, effective July 1. L. 2023: (1), (3), and (9) amended, (HB 23-1034), ch. 15, p. 44, § 2, effective October 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 2014–2026 · leading case:
People v. Young, 412 P.3d 676 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014).
People v. Young, 412 P.3d 676 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 15× “That court did not set forth any specific findings other than to note that counsel was appointed for a "post-conviction request for DNA test pursuant to C.R.S. 18-1-412." ¶ 15 The first postconviction court held a hearing in April 2006.”
Jackson v. State, 139 A.3d 976 (Md. 2016).
“” Ohio Rev.Code Ann. § 2953.74 (2016). Colorado’s statute only provides, ”[t]he court may deny a second or subsequent motion requesting relief pursuant to this section.”
Peo v. Thames (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 13× “35(c) or as a motion for postconviction DNA testing under section 18-1-412, C.R.S. 2024. He also asserts new claims of a due process violation, prosecutorial misconduct, and ineffective assistance of trial counsel.”
Peo v. Daniel (Colo. Ct. App. 2026).
· cites it 7× “To obtain relief under section 18-1-412, the defendant must include in the application “specific facts sufficient to support a prima facie showing that post-conviction relief is warranted under the criteria set forth in section 18-1-413.” § 18-1-412(2). “If the motion, files,…”
Peo v. Hunter (Colo. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 3× “1 Because we agree with the reasons stated by the trial court f or its denial of the petition, we don’t consider the People’s argument that Hunter also failed to include the results of all prior DN A tests in his petition, as required by section 18-1-412(2), C.R.S. 2021.”
Peo v. Hebert (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 3× “Under section 18-1-412(2), a motion for such testing “shall include specific facts sufficient to support a prima facie showing that post-conviction relief is warranted under the criteria set forth in section 18-1-413, [C.”
Peo v. Solazzo (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 3× “But because Salozzo does not seek relief based on the same specific facts he raised in his motion, see section 18-1-412(2), C.R.S. 2025, we decline to address the new arguments he asserts on appeal.”
Peo v. Lucero (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 3× “§ 18-1-412(2), C.R.S. 2025. The postconviction court may deny a motion without a hearing or appointing counsel if the motion, files, and record show that the defendant is not entitled to relief.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1-412(1) — 2 cases
People v. Young, 412 P.3d 676 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014).
“That court did not set forth any specific findings other than to note that counsel was appointed for a "post-conviction request for DNA test pursuant to C.R.S. 18-1-412." ¶ 15 The first postconviction court held a hearing in April 2006.”
Peo v. Daniel (Colo. Ct. App. 2026).
“To obtain relief under section 18-1-412, the defendant must include in the application “specific facts sufficient to support a prima facie showing that post-conviction relief is warranted under the criteria set forth in section 18-1-413.” § 18-1-412(2). “If the motion, files,…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1-412(2) — 7 cases
People v. Young, 412 P.3d 676 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014).
“That court did not set forth any specific findings other than to note that counsel was appointed for a "post-conviction request for DNA test pursuant to C.R.S. 18-1-412." ¶ 15 The first postconviction court held a hearing in April 2006.”
Peo v. Hunter (Colo. Ct. App. 2022).
“1 Because we agree with the reasons stated by the trial court f or its denial of the petition, we don’t consider the People’s argument that Hunter also failed to include the results of all prior DN A tests in his petition, as required by section 18-1-412(2), C.R.S. 2021.”
Peo v. Solazzo (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
“But because Salozzo does not seek relief based on the same specific facts he raised in his motion, see section 18-1-412(2), C.R.S. 2025, we decline to address the new arguments he asserts on appeal.”
Peo v. Hebert (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
“Under section 18-1-412(2), a motion for such testing “shall include specific facts sufficient to support a prima facie showing that post-conviction relief is warranted under the criteria set forth in section 18-1-413, [C.”
Peo v. Lucero (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
“§ 18-1-412(2), C.R.S. 2025. The postconviction court may deny a motion without a hearing or appointing counsel if the motion, files, and record show that the defendant is not entitled to relief.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1-412(3) — 4 cases
Jackson v. State, 139 A.3d 976 (Md. 2016).
“” Ohio Rev.Code Ann. § 2953.74 (2016). Colorado’s statute only provides, ”[t]he court may deny a second or subsequent motion requesting relief pursuant to this section.”
Peo v. Hebert (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
“Under section 18-1-412(2), a motion for such testing “shall include specific facts sufficient to support a prima facie showing that post-conviction relief is warranted under the criteria set forth in section 18-1-413, [C.”
Peo v. Lucero (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
“§ 18-1-412(2), C.R.S. 2025. The postconviction court may deny a motion without a hearing or appointing counsel if the motion, files, and record show that the defendant is not entitled to relief.”
Peo v. Daniel (Colo. Ct. App. 2026).
“To obtain relief under section 18-1-412, the defendant must include in the application “specific facts sufficient to support a prima facie showing that post-conviction relief is warranted under the criteria set forth in section 18-1-413.” § 18-1-412(2). “If the motion, files,…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1-412(5) — 1 case
People v. Young, 412 P.3d 676 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014).
“That court did not set forth any specific findings other than to note that counsel was appointed for a "post-conviction request for DNA test pursuant to C.R.S. 18-1-412." ¶ 15 The first postconviction court held a hearing in April 2006.”
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.