Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 18
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-104 (2026)

Alternatives in imposition of sentence

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

(1) Within the limitations of the applicable statute pertaining to sentencing and subject to the provisions of this title 18, the trial court has the following alternatives in entering judgment imposing a sentence:

(a) The defendant may be granted probation unless any provision of law makes him or her ineligible for probation. The granting or denial of probation and the conditions of probation including the length of probation shall not be subject to appellate review unless probation is granted contrary to the provisions of this title.

(b) Subject to the provisions of sections 18-1.3-401 and 18-1.3-401.5, in class 2, class 3, class 4, class 5, and class 6 felonies and level 1, level 2, level 3, and level 4 drug felonies, the defendant may be sentenced to imprisonment for a definite period of time. (b.5) (I) Except as otherwise provided by subparagraph (II) of this paragraph (b.5), any defendant who, in the determination of the court, is a candidate for an alternative sentencing option and who would otherwise be sentenced to imprisonment pursuant to paragraph (b) of this subsection (1) may, as an alternative, be sentenced to a specialized restitution and community service program pursuant to section 18-1.3-302, which may include restorative justice practices, as defined in section 18-1-901 (3)(o.5), if such defendant is determined eligible and is accepted into such program. To be eligible for restorative justice practices, the defendant shall not have been convicted of unlawful sexual behavior as defined in section 16-22-102 (9), C.R.S., a crime in which the underlying factual basis involves domestic violence, as defined in section 18-6- 800.3 (1), stalking as defined in section 18-3-602, or violation of a protection order as defined in section 18-6-803.5. If the court orders the defendant to attend a restorative justice practices victim-offender conference, the facilitator of the conference shall provide his or her services for a fee of no more than one hundred twenty-five dollars, based on a sliding scale; however, the fee may be waived by the court. Any statements made during the conference shall be confidential and shall not be used as a basis for charging or prosecuting the defendant unless the defendant commits a chargeable offense during the conference.

(II) (A) The court shall consider and may sentence any defendant who is a nonviolent offender as defined in sub-subparagraph (B) of this subparagraph (II) pursuant to subsection (2) of this section.

(B) As used in this section, "nonviolent offender" means a person convicted of a felony other than a crime of violence as defined in section 18-1.3-406 (2), one of the felonies set forth in section 18-3-104, 18-4-203, 18-4-301, or 18-4-401 (2)(c) or (5), or a felony offense committed against a child as set forth in articles 3, 6, and 7 of this title 18, and who is not subject to the provisions of section 18-1.3-801.

(c) The defendant shall be sentenced to death in those cases in which a death sentence is required pursuant to section 18-1.3-1201 for an offense charged prior to July 1, 2020, or pursuant to section 18-1.3-1302 for an offense charged prior to July 1, 2020, or pursuant to section 18-1.4- 102.

(d) The defendant may be sentenced to the payment of a fine or to a term of imprisonment or to both a term of imprisonment and the payment of a fine; except that a person who has been twice convicted of a felony under the laws of this state, any other state, or the United States prior to the conviction for which he or she is being sentenced is not eligible to receive a fine in lieu of imprisonment. No fine shall be imposed for conviction of a felony except as provided in sections 18-1.3-401 and 25-15-310, articles 22 to 29 of title 39, or article 3 of title 42, C.R.S.

(e) The defendant may be sentenced to comply with any other court order authorized by law.

(f) The defendant may be sentenced to payment of costs.

(g) The defendant may be sentenced pursuant to part 4 or 5 of this article.

(h) (I) If the defendant is eligible pursuant to section 18-1.3-407.5 or section 19-2.5-801 (5), the defendant may be sentenced to the youthful offender system in accordance with section 18-1.3-407.

(II) Repealed.

(i) Notwithstanding any provision of this subsection (1) to the contrary, the court shall sentence any person convicted of a sex offense, as defined in section 18-1.3-1003 (5), committed on or after November 1, 1998, pursuant to the provisions of part 10 of this article.

(2) (a) The sentencing court shall consider the following factors in sentencing nonviolent offenders:

(I) The nature and character of the offense;

(II) The character and record of the nonviolent offender, including whether the offender is a first-time offender;

(III) The offender's employment history;

(IV) The potential rehabilitative value of the sentencing alternatives available to the court;

(V) Any potential impact on the safety of the victim, the victim's family, and the general public based upon sentencing alternatives available to the court; and

(VI) The offender's ability to pay restitution to the victim or the victim's family based upon the sentencing alternatives available to the court.

(b) Repealed.

(c) The court shall consider and may sentence a nonviolent offender to any one or any combination of the sentences described in this paragraph (c) if, upon consideration of the factors described in paragraph (a) of this subsection (2), the court does not grant probation pursuant to paragraph (b) of this subsection (2) or does not sentence the offender to the department of corrections as provided under paragraph (d) of this subsection (2):

(I) A community corrections program pursuant to section 18-1.3-301;

(II) A home detention program pursuant to section 18-1.3-105; or

(III) A specialized restitution and community service program pursuant to section 18- 1.3-302.

(d) Nothing in this subsection (2) shall be construed as prohibiting a court from exercising its discretion in sentencing a nonviolent offender to the department of corrections based upon, but not limited to, any one or more factors described in paragraph (a) of this subsection (2).

(3) (a) In determining the appropriate sentencing alternative for a defendant who has been convicted of unlawful sexual behavior as defined in section 16-22-102 (9), the sentencing court shall consider the defendant's previous criminal and juvenile delinquency records, if any, set forth in the presentence investigation report prepared pursuant to section 16-11-102 (1)(a), C.R.S.

(b) For purposes of this subsection (3), "convicted" means a conviction by a jury or by a court and shall also include a deferred judgment and sentence, a deferred adjudication, an adjudication, and a plea of guilty or nolo contendere. Source: L. 2002: Entire article added with relocations, p. 1368, § 2, effective October 1. L. 2002, 3rd Ex. Sess.: (1)(c) amended, p. 32, § 24, effective October 1. L. 2003: IP(1), (1)(a), and (1)(b) amended, p. 975, § 12, effective April 17. L. 2004: (1)(h)(II) repealed, p. 243, § 1, effective April 5. L. 2009: (1)(h)(I) amended, (HB 09-1122), ch. 77, p. 280, § 3, effective October 1. L. 2010: (1)(h)(I) amended, (HB 10-1413), ch. 264, p. 1204, § 4, effective August 11. L. 2011: (1)(b.5)(I) amended, (HB 11-1032), ch. 296, p. 1402, § 7, effective August 10. L. 2013:

(1)(b) amended and (2)(b) repealed, (SB 13-250), ch. 333, p. 1935, § 53, effective October 1. L. 2014: (1)(b) amended, (SB 14-163), ch. 391, p. 1972, § 9, effective June 6. L. 2020: IP(1) and

(1)(c) amended, (SB 20-100), ch. 61, p. 208, § 9, effective March 23. L. 2021: (1)(h)(I) amended, (SB 21-059), ch. 136, p. 718, § 40, effective October 1; (1)(b.5)(II)(B) amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3168, § 181, effective March 1, 2022.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 16-11-101 as it existed prior to 2002.

Cross references: For the legislative declaration contained in the 2002 act amending subsection (1)(c), see section 16 of chapter 1 of the supplement to the Session Laws of Colorado 2002, Third Extraordinary Session.

18-1.3-104.5. Alternatives in imposition of sentence in drug felony cases - exhaustion of remedies. (1) The general assembly finds that it is essential in certain level 4 drug felony cases that the court consider all sentencing options to ensure that the state's costly prison resources are used for those offenders for whom another sentence is not appropriate or will not properly meet the goals of community safety and rehabilitation of the offender.

(2) (a) Prior to the imposition of any sentence to the department of corrections for a level 4 drug felony offense at sentencing or at resentencing after a revocation of probation or community corrections sentence, the court shall exhaust all reasonable and appropriate alternative sentences for the offense considering all factors outlined in paragraph (b) of this subsection (2).

(b) If the court sentences the defendant to the department of corrections for a level 4 drug felony offense, it must determine that incarceration is the most suitable option given the facts and circumstances of the case, including the defendant's willingness to participate in treatment. Further, the court must also determine that all other reasonable and appropriate sanctions and responses to the violation that are available to the court have been tried and failed, do not appear likely to be successful if tried, or present an unacceptable risk to public safety.

(c) In making the determination in paragraph (b) of this subsection (2), the court shall review, to the extent available, the information provided by the supervising agency, which includes, but is not limited to, a complete statement as to what treatment and sentencing options have been tried and have failed, what other community options are available and the reasons why any other available community options appear to be unlikely to be successful. The supervising agency shall provide to the court the risk level of the offender as determined by an evidence- based risk assessment tool employed by the supervising agency and any other information relevant to the defendant's risk to public safety.

Source: L. 2013: Entire section added, (SB 13-250), ch. 333, p. 1902, § 2, effective October 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: Veith v. People, 2017 CO 19 (Colo. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Veith v. People, 2017 CO 19 (Colo. 2017). · cites it 3× “If the defendant “rejects probation,” the court may instead sentence him to incarceration under section 18-1.3-104, C.R.S. (2016). Smith, ¶ 8, 318 P.”
People v. Kennaugh, 80 P.3d 315 (Colo. 2003). · cites it 8× “NOTES [1] Since 1999, section 16-11-101 has been re-codified to section 18-1.3-104 and section 16-11-202 has been re-codified to section 18-1.”
People v. Heisler, 2017 COA 58 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “¶ 32 Under section 18-1.3-104(1)(a), C.R.S. 2016, a court may alternatively order probation: When it appears to the satisfaction of the court that the ends of justice and the best interest of the public, as well as the defendant, will be served thereby, the court may grant the…”
People v. Glasser, 293 P.3d 68 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011). “§ 18-1.3-104(7) & (8)(c), C.R.98.2010 (formerly codified at § 18-1-105(7) & see also People v.”
People v. Smith, 318 P.3d 472 (Colo. 2014). · cites it 6× “8-405, to determine whether the statute requires a trial court, when sentencing an offender to probation that includes a jail component, to credit an offender for presentence confinement in a certain amount.”
People v. Jenkins, 305 P.3d 420 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). “" § 18-1.3-104(1)(a), C.R.98.2012. However, as the quoted language indicates, where, as here, a defendant contends that "a court has exceeded its statutory authority" in imposing a probationary sentence, appellate review is warranted.”
People v. Rossman, 140 P.3d 172 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 3× “5) that he submit biological samples for DNA testing, maintaining that it exceeds the court’s authority because it violates the state and federal constitutional prohibition against warrantless searches and seizures conducted without probable cause.”
People v. Watkins, 282 P.3d 500 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “13 We conclude that the People's allegations are sufficient to invoke our jurisdiction under section 18-1.3-104(1)(a) and CAR. l(a)(1).”
People v. Hernandez-Clavel, 186 P.3d 96 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “As a threshold matter, we address and reject the People's argument that the appeal should be dismissed. We agree with the People that the grant or denial of probation, as a discretionary determination, is not subject to appellate review.”
People v. Dinkel, 321 P.3d 569 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 3× “§ 18-1.3-104(1)(), C.R.S.2012. T 9 The Sex Offender Lifetime Supervision Act, sections 18-1.”
People v. Sanders, 220 P.3d 1020 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “" § 18-1.3-104(1)(a), C.R.S.2009. Although we accept appeals where a condition of probation was based on "considerations not statutorily or constitutionally authorized," see People v.”
People v. Allman, 2017 COA 108 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “¶ 36 As an initial matter, we note that a sentence to probation is not ordinarily subject to appellate review unless it was granted contrary to the provisions of section 18-1.3-104(1)(a), C.R.S. 2016, or section 18-1.”
Show all 30 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-104(1) — 6 cases
People v. Kennaugh, 80 P.3d 315 (Colo. 2003). “NOTES [1] Since 1999, section 16-11-101 has been re-codified to section 18-1.3-104 and section 16-11-202 has been re-codified to section 18-1.”
People v. Dinkel, 321 P.3d 569 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). “§ 18-1.3-104(1)(), C.R.S.2012. T 9 The Sex Offender Lifetime Supervision Act, sections 18-1.”
People v. Anderson, 348 P.3d 491 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015).
Peo v. Jost (Colo. Ct. App. 2024).
Peo v. McDonald (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-104(1)(a) — 14 cases
People v. Heisler, 2017 COA 58 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017). “¶ 32 Under section 18-1.3-104(1)(a), C.R.S. 2016, a court may alternatively order probation: When it appears to the satisfaction of the court that the ends of justice and the best interest of the public, as well as the defendant, will be served thereby, the court may grant the…”
People v. Jenkins, 305 P.3d 420 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013). “" § 18-1.3-104(1)(a), C.R.98.2012. However, as the quoted language indicates, where, as here, a defendant contends that "a court has exceeded its statutory authority" in imposing a probationary sentence, appellate review is warranted.”
People v. Rossman, 140 P.3d 172 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006). “5) that he submit biological samples for DNA testing, maintaining that it exceeds the court’s authority because it violates the state and federal constitutional prohibition against warrantless searches and seizures conducted without probable cause.”
People v. Watkins, 282 P.3d 500 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). “13 We conclude that the People's allegations are sufficient to invoke our jurisdiction under section 18-1.3-104(1)(a) and CAR. l(a)(1).”
People v. Hernandez-Clavel, 186 P.3d 96 (Colo. Ct. App. 2008). “As a threshold matter, we address and reject the People's argument that the appeal should be dismissed. We agree with the People that the grant or denial of probation, as a discretionary determination, is not subject to appellate review.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-104(1)(b) — 1 case
Peo v. Jost (Colo. Ct. App. 2024).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-104(2)(a) — 1 case
Peo v. Gurrola (Colo. Ct. App. 2026).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-104(3)(b) — 2 cases
People ex rel. A.B., 411 P.3d 1116 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016).
In re A.B, 2016 COA 170 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-104(7) — 1 case
People v. Glasser, 293 P.3d 68 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011). “§ 18-1.3-104(7) & (8)(c), C.R.98.2010 (formerly codified at § 18-1-105(7) & see also People v.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-104(l) — 1 case
Chism v. People, 80 P.3d 293 (Colo. 2003).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-104(l)(a) — 1 case
People v. Smith, 318 P.3d 472 (Colo. 2014). “8-405, to determine whether the statute requires a trial court, when sentencing an offender to probation that includes a jail component, to credit an offender for presentence confinement in a certain amount.”
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.