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

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-115 (2026)

Charitable fraud

✓ 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(Repealed) Source: L. 75: Entire section added, p. 636, § 1, effective July 14. L. 77: (1)(b) and

(1)(c) amended, p. 964, § 31, effective July 1. L. 84: (1)(a) amended and (1)(d) added, p. 546, § 1, effective April 12. L. 87: (1)(e) to (1)(g) added, p. 611, § 24, effective July 1. L. 88: Entire section repealed, p. 359, § 3, effective July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1983–1988 · leading case: People v. French, 762 P.2d 1369 (Colo. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. French, 762 P.2d 1369 (Colo. 1988). · cites it 35× “On December 19, 1986, indictments were returned in the Jefferson County District Court against Joseph L. French and Thomas A. Atkins, corporate officers of Bristle-cone Telemarketing, Inc.”
People v. Moyer., 670 P.2d 785 (Colo. 1983). · cites it 15× “Section 18-5-115, C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl.”
People v. Rubanowitz, 688 P.2d 231 (Colo. 1984). · cites it 2× “III Defendant contends that his conviction of charitable fraud, in violation of section 18-5-115(l)(a), 8 C.R.S. (1978), must be set aside because that statute is unconstitutionally vague.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-115(1)(a) — 1 case
People v. French, 762 P.2d 1369 (Colo. 1988). “On December 19, 1986, indictments were returned in the Jefferson County District Court against Joseph L. French and Thomas A. Atkins, corporate officers of Bristle-cone Telemarketing, Inc.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-5-115(l)(a) — 2 cases
People v. Moyer., 670 P.2d 785 (Colo. 1983). “Section 18-5-115, C.R.S. 1973 (1978 Repl.”
People v. Rubanowitz, 688 P.2d 231 (Colo. 1984). “III Defendant contends that his conviction of charitable fraud, in violation of section 18-5-115(l)(a), 8 C.R.S. (1978), must be set aside because that statute is unconstitutionally vague.”
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.