(1) A person commits a class 1 misdemeanor if:
(a) He knowingly and unlawfully aims a firearm at another person; or
(b) Recklessly or with criminal negligence he discharges a firearm or shoots a bow and arrow; or
(c) He knowingly sets a loaded gun, trap, or device designed to cause an explosion upon being tripped or approached, and leaves it unattended by a competent person immediately present; or
(d) The person has in his or her possession a firearm while the person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or of a controlled substance, as defined in section 18-18-102 (5). Possession of a permit issued under section 18-12-105.1, as it existed prior to its repeal, or possession of a permit or a temporary emergency permit issued pursuant to part 2 of this article is no defense to a violation of this subsection (1).
(2) (a) A person commits a class 2 misdemeanor if the person knowingly aims, swings, or throws a throwing star or nunchaku as defined in this subsection (2)(b) at another person, or the person knowingly possesses a throwing star or nunchaku in a public place except for the purpose of presenting an authorized public demonstration or exhibition or pursuant to instruction in conjunction with an organized school or class. When transporting throwing stars or nunchaku for a public demonstration or exhibition or for a school or class, they shall be transported in a closed, nonaccessible container.
(b) For purposes of this subsection (2), "nunchaku" means an instrument consisting of two sticks, clubs, bars, or rods to be used as handles, connected by a rope, cord, wire, or chain, which is in the design of a weapon used in connection with the practice of a system of self- defense, and "throwing star" means a disk having sharp radiating points or any disk-shaped bladed object which is hand-held and thrown and which is in the design of a weapon used in connection with the practice of a system of self-defense.
Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 482, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 40-12-106. L. 77: (1)(a) and (1)(c) amended, p. 971, § 63, effective July 1. L. 81: (1)(d) amended, p. 738, § 25, effective July 1. L. 82: (1)(d) amended, p. 623, § 18, effective April 2. L. 84: (1)(e) added, p. 539, § 17, effective July 1. L. 2003: (1)(d) amended, p. 649, § 5, effective May 17. L. 2012: (1)(d) amended, (HB 12-1311), ch. 281, p. 1620, § 48, effective July 1. L. 2021: Entire section amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3209, § 345, effective March 1, 2022.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
26
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case:
People v. Koper, 2018 COA 137 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
People v. Koper, 2018 COA 137 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 4× “The People also charged defendant with 2 prohibited possession of a firearm under section 18-12-106(1)(d), C.R.S. 2017 (prohibiting “possession [of] a firearm while [a] person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor”).”
Beckett v. People, 800 P.2d 74 (Colo. 1990).
· cites it 15× “Section 18-12-106 provides, in pertinent part: "(1) A person commits a class 2 misdemeanor if .”
People v. Garcia, 595 P.2d 228 (Colo. 1979).
· cites it 9× “The title of that section is “Prohibited use of weapons” (emphasis added); all of the other acts proscribed by the statute entail some active use — “aims,” “discharges,” “sets trap.” Interpreting “possession” to mean anything other than actual or physical control would thus…”
Yusem v. People, 210 P.3d 458 (Colo. 2009).
· cites it 2× “§ 18-12-106(1)(a), C.R.S. (2005). . Although the court of appeals analyzed the first trial judge's ruling, we see no need to review purposes for admissibility that were modified before trial and therefore not instructed to the jury.”
People v. Wilson, 972 P.2d 701 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 10× “224, §18-12-106 at 971. The language of subsection (d) was also amended twice, first in 1981 and again in 1982.”
People v. Pflugbeil, 834 P.2d 843 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “The People concede that no statute expressly allows a court to order the confiscation of weapons from an individual certified for short-term treatment.”
People v. Trujillo, 83 P.3d 642 (Colo. 2004).
· cites it 2× “(2001), and prohibited use of a weapon, § 18-12-106, 6 C.R.S. (2001). At sentencing, the trial court — at the prosecution’s request — dismissed all four of the lesser non-included offenses (the two the jury found him guilty of in the second trial and the two the jury found him…”
People v. Warner, 251 P.3d 556 (Colo. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “See § 18-12-106(1)(d), C.R.S.2009. In People v.”
People v. Geisendorfer, 991 P.2d 308 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 2× “Defendant objected on the basis that, under § 18-12-106, C.R.S. 1999, a conviction for prohibited use of a weapon was not limited to a finding that defendant knowingly and unlawfully aimed a firearm at the victim.”
People v. Senn, 824 P.2d 822 (Colo. 1992).
· cites it 5× “2 Section 18-12-106, 8B C.R.S. (1986), provides in part: 18-12-106.”
People v. McPherson, 619 P.2d 38 (Colo. 1980).
· cites it 3× “” 6 The defendant contends that the jury also should have been instructed on the lesser non-included offense of prohibited use of a weapon, section 18-12-106(1)(a), C.R.S. 1973 (now in 1978 Repl.”
People v. Lopez, 140 P.3d 106 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 2× “1998) (holding that misdemeanor offense of prohibited use of a weapon while intoxicated under § 18-12-106(1)(d), C.R.S.2005, is a strict liability offense).”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-106(1) — 2 cases
People v. Wilson, 972 P.2d 701 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998).
“224, §18-12-106 at 971. The language of subsection (d) was also amended twice, first in 1981 and again in 1982.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-106(1)(a) — 3 cases
Yusem v. People, 210 P.3d 458 (Colo. 2009).
“§ 18-12-106(1)(a), C.R.S. (2005). . Although the court of appeals analyzed the first trial judge's ruling, we see no need to review purposes for admissibility that were modified before trial and therefore not instructed to the jury.”
People v. McPherson, 619 P.2d 38 (Colo. 1980).
“” 6 The defendant contends that the jury also should have been instructed on the lesser non-included offense of prohibited use of a weapon, section 18-12-106(1)(a), C.R.S. 1973 (now in 1978 Repl.”
People v. Senn, 824 P.2d 822 (Colo. 1992).
“2 Section 18-12-106, 8B C.R.S. (1986), provides in part: 18-12-106.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-106(1)(b) — 2 cases
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-106(1)(d) — 7 cases
People v. Koper, 2018 COA 137 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
“The People also charged defendant with 2 prohibited possession of a firearm under section 18-12-106(1)(d), C.R.S. 2017 (prohibiting “possession [of] a firearm while [a] person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor”).”
Beckett v. People, 800 P.2d 74 (Colo. 1990).
“Section 18-12-106 provides, in pertinent part: "(1) A person commits a class 2 misdemeanor if .”
People v. Warner, 251 P.3d 556 (Colo. Ct. App. 2010).
“See § 18-12-106(1)(d), C.R.S.2009. In People v.”
People v. Lopez, 140 P.3d 106 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006).
“1998) (holding that misdemeanor offense of prohibited use of a weapon while intoxicated under § 18-12-106(1)(d), C.R.S.2005, is a strict liability offense).”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-106(l)(a) — 1 case
People v. Wilson, 972 P.2d 701 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998).
“224, §18-12-106 at 971. The language of subsection (d) was also amended twice, first in 1981 and again in 1982.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-106(l)(b) — 1 case
People v. Wilson, 972 P.2d 701 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998).
“224, §18-12-106 at 971. The language of subsection (d) was also amended twice, first in 1981 and again in 1982.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-106(l)(d) — 3 cases
People v. Pflugbeil, 834 P.2d 843 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).
“The People concede that no statute expressly allows a court to order the confiscation of weapons from an individual certified for short-term treatment.”
Beckett v. People, 800 P.2d 74 (Colo. 1990).
“Section 18-12-106 provides, in pertinent part: "(1) A person commits a class 2 misdemeanor if .”
People v. Wilson, 972 P.2d 701 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998).
“224, §18-12-106 at 971. The language of subsection (d) was also amended twice, first in 1981 and again in 1982.”
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.