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

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601 (2026)

Legislative declaration

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

(1) The general assembly finds and declares that:

(a) Crime victims endure undue suffering and hardship resulting from physical injury, emotional and psychological injury, or loss of property;

(b) Persons found guilty of causing such suffering and hardship should be under a moral and legal obligation to make full restitution to those harmed by their misconduct;

(c) The payment of restitution by criminal offenders to their victims is a mechanism for the rehabilitation of offenders;

(d) Restitution is recognized as a deterrent to future criminality;

(e) An effective criminal justice system requires timely restitution to victims of crime and to members of the immediate families of such victims in order to lessen the financial burdens inflicted upon them, to compensate them for their suffering and hardship, and to preserve the individual dignity of victims;

(f) Former procedures for restitution assessment, collection, and distribution have proven to be inadequate and inconsistent from case to case;

(g) The purposes of this part 6 are to facilitate:

(I) The establishment of programs and procedures to provide for and collect full restitution for victims of crime in the most expeditious manner; and

(II) The effective and timely assessment, collection, and distribution of restitution requires the cooperation and collaboration of all criminal justice agencies and departments.

(2) It is the intent of the general assembly that restitution be ordered, collected, and disbursed to the victims of crime and their immediate families. Such restitution will aid the offender in reintegration as a productive member of society. This part 6 shall be liberally construed to accomplish all such purposes.

Source: L. 2002: Entire article added with relocations, p. 1419, § 2, effective October 1.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 16-18.5-101 as it existed prior to 2002.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 79 cases (35 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case: The People of the State of Colorado v. Benjamin Weeks, 2021 CO 75 (Colo. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
The People of the State of Colorado v. Benjamin Weeks, 2021 CO 75 (Colo. 2021). · cites it 3× “See § 18-1.3-601 (1) (e) , C.R.S. ( 2021 ) ( "An effective criminal justice system requires timely restitution to victims of crime .”
Cowen v. People, 2018 CO 96 (Colo. 2018). · cites it 3× “" § 18-1.3-601(1)(a), (b), C.R.S. (2018) (emphasis added).”
The People of the State of Colorado v. Zachary Eugene Babcock, 2023 COA 49 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “" § 18-1.3-601(1)(b), C.R.S. 2022. Restitution "means any pecuniary loss suffered by a victim .”
v. Barbre, 2018 COA 123 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “2017; see also § 18-1.3-601(1)(b), C.R.S. 2017 (Defendants have an “obligation to make full restitution to those harmed by their misconduct.”
Pineda-Liberato v. People, 2017 CO 95 (Colo. 2017). · cites it 4× “§ 18-1.3-601(1)(c)–(e), C.R.S. (2017). The legislative declaration further provides, “It is the intent of the general assembly that restitution be ordered, collected, and disbursed to the victims of crime and their immediate families.”
People v. Lassek, 122 P.3d 1029 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 3× “Section 18-1.3-601(2), C.R.S.2004. “Any amount paid to a victim under an order of restitution shall be set off against any amount later recovered as compensatory damages by such victim in any federal or state civil proceeding.”
v. Martinez-Chavez, 2020 COA 39 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “” § 18-1.3-601, C.R.S. 2019. ¶ 12 Each judicial district has a CVCB.”
People v. Nelson, 2015 CO 68 (Colo. 2015). · cites it 10× “See § 18-1.3-601. Similarly, the court was required to disburse the money collected from costs and fees into public funds.”
Peo v. Stone, 2020 COA 24 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “2005)(quoting § 18-1.3-601(2), C.R.S. 2004). A trial court must order restitution whenever a defendant’s criminal conduct causes pecuniary damage to a victim.”
v. Gregory, 2019 COA 184 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). “See § 18-1.3-601(1)(c)-(e), C.R.S. 2019; Lassek, 122 P.”
People v. Rockne, 315 P.3d 172 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 8× “2012 (emphasis added); ® - "Former procedures for restitution assessment, collection, and distribution have proven to be inadequate," section 18-1.3-601(1)(F), C.R.S.2012; and, e - "The purposes of [the restitution statute] are to facilitate .”
Meza v. People, 2018 CO 23 (Colo. 2018). “2, §§ 18-1.3-601 to -603, 2002 Colo. Sess. Laws 1365 , 1419-22-altered existing law by relieving the sentencing court of its obligation to set the amount of restitution at the time of sentencing *307 and endorse it on the mittimus.”
Show all 79 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1) — 1 case
People v. Pagan, 165 P.3d 724 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1)(F) — 1 case
People v. Rockne, 315 P.3d 172 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). “2012 (emphasis added); ® - "Former procedures for restitution assessment, collection, and distribution have proven to be inadequate," section 18-1.3-601(1)(F), C.R.S.2012; and, e - "The purposes of [the restitution statute] are to facilitate .”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1)(a) — 9 cases
Cowen v. People, 2018 CO 96 (Colo. 2018). “" § 18-1.3-601(1)(a), (b), C.R.S. (2018) (emphasis added).”
People v. Rockne, 315 P.3d 172 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). “2012 (emphasis added); ® - "Former procedures for restitution assessment, collection, and distribution have proven to be inadequate," section 18-1.3-601(1)(F), C.R.S.2012; and, e - "The purposes of [the restitution statute] are to facilitate .”
v. Sosa, 2019 COA 182 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019).
People v. Rivera, 250 P.3d 1272 (Colo. Ct. App. 2010).
People v. Nelson, 2015 CO 68 (Colo. 2015). “See § 18-1.3-601. Similarly, the court was required to disburse the money collected from costs and fees into public funds.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1)(b) — 25 cases
The People of the State of Colorado v. Zachary Eugene Babcock, 2023 COA 49 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023). “" § 18-1.3-601(1)(b), C.R.S. 2022. Restitution "means any pecuniary loss suffered by a victim .”
v. Barbre, 2018 COA 123 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018). “2017; see also § 18-1.3-601(1)(b), C.R.S. 2017 (Defendants have an “obligation to make full restitution to those harmed by their misconduct.”
People v. Alexander Ryan Fregosi, 547 P.3d 402 (Colo. Ct. App. 2024).
People v. Rockne, 315 P.3d 172 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012). “2012 (emphasis added); ® - "Former procedures for restitution assessment, collection, and distribution have proven to be inadequate," section 18-1.3-601(1)(F), C.R.S.2012; and, e - "The purposes of [the restitution statute] are to facilitate .”
People v. Stovall, 75 P.3d 1165 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1)(c) — 12 cases
v. Gregory, 2019 COA 184 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). “See § 18-1.3-601(1)(c)-(e), C.R.S. 2019; Lassek, 122 P.”
Cowen v. People, 2018 CO 96 (Colo. 2018). “" § 18-1.3-601(1)(a), (b), C.R.S. (2018) (emphasis added).”
Pineda-Liberato v. People, 2017 CO 95 (Colo. 2017). “§ 18-1.3-601(1)(c)–(e), C.R.S. (2017). The legislative declaration further provides, “It is the intent of the general assembly that restitution be ordered, collected, and disbursed to the victims of crime and their immediate families.”
People v. Nelson, 2015 CO 68 (Colo. 2015). “See § 18-1.3-601. Similarly, the court was required to disburse the money collected from costs and fees into public funds.”
People v. Smith, 181 P.3d 324 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1)(d) — 1 case
Peo v. Eddington (Colo. Ct. App. 2026).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1)(e) — 8 cases
People v. Cardenas, 262 P.3d 913 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011).
People v. Daly, 313 P.3d 571 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011).
Peo in Interest of A.N, 2019 COA 67 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019).
v. Ray, 2018 COA 158 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
Shaun Jeff Snow v. The People of the State of Colorado, 2025 CO 32 (Colo. 2025).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1)(g) — 1 case
Zachary Eugene Babcock v. The People of the State of Colorado, 2025 CO 26 (Colo. 2025).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1)(g)(I) — 7 cases
Peo in Interest of A.N, 2019 COA 67 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019).
People v. Madden, 2015 CO 69 (Colo. 2015).
v. Ray, 2018 COA 158 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
People v. Madden, 2015 CO 69 (Colo. 2015).
Peo v. Brentner (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(1)(g)(ID) — 1 case
People v. Madden, 2015 CO 69 (Colo. 2015).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(2) — 15 cases
People v. Lassek, 122 P.3d 1029 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005). “Section 18-1.3-601(2), C.R.S.2004. “Any amount paid to a victim under an order of restitution shall be set off against any amount later recovered as compensatory damages by such victim in any federal or state civil proceeding.”
Peo v. Stone, 2020 COA 24 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020). “2005)(quoting § 18-1.3-601(2), C.R.S. 2004). A trial court must order restitution whenever a defendant’s criminal conduct causes pecuniary damage to a victim.”
Pineda-Liberato v. People, 2017 CO 95 (Colo. 2017). “§ 18-1.3-601(1)(c)–(e), C.R.S. (2017). The legislative declaration further provides, “It is the intent of the general assembly that restitution be ordered, collected, and disbursed to the victims of crime and their immediate families.”
Cowen v. People, 2018 CO 96 (Colo. 2018). “" § 18-1.3-601(1)(a), (b), C.R.S. (2018) (emphasis added).”
Dubois v. People, 211 P.3d 41 (Colo. 2009).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(b) — 1 case
Peo v. Espinoza (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(l)(b) — 1 case
People v. Vasseur, 2016 COA 107 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-601(l)(c) — 1 case
Pineda-Liberato v. People, 2017 CO 95 (Colo. 2017). “§ 18-1.3-601(1)(c)–(e), C.R.S. (2017). The legislative declaration further provides, “It is the intent of the general assembly that restitution be ordered, collected, and disbursed to the victims of crime and their immediate families.”
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.