(1) A person who is serving a direct sentence to a community corrections program pursuant to section 18-1.3-301; transitioning from the department of corrections to a community corrections program or placed in an intensive supervision program pursuant to section 17-27.5-101; participating in a work release or home detention program pursuant to section 18-1.3-106 (1.1), intensive supervision program, or any other similar authorized supervised or unsupervised absence from a detention facility as defined in section 18-8-203 (3); transitioning from the department of human services to a residential facility or program pursuant to section 16-8-115 or 16-8-118; or is housed in a staff secure facility as defined in section 19-2.5-102 commits the crime of unauthorized absence if the person knowingly:
(a) Leaves or fails to return to his or her residential or facility location without permission of the supervising agency and in violation of the terms and conditions of supervision; or
(b) Removes or tampers with an electronic monitoring device required by the supervising agency to be worn by the person in order to monitor his or her location, without permission and with the intent to avoid arrest, prosecution, monitoring, or other legal process.
(2) (a) If a person commits unauthorized absence for a crime listed in section 24-4.1-302 (1) or a crime of violence as described in section 18-1.3-406, unauthorized absence is a class 6 felony and an attempt thereof is a class 6 felony.
(b) If a person commits unauthorized absence for a crime other than the crimes listed in section 24-4.1-302 (1) and the crime is not a crime of violence as described in section 18-1.3- 406, unauthorized absence is a class 2 misdemeanor and an attempt thereof is a class 2 misdemeanor.
(c) A person who knowingly violates a permanent or temporary protection order issued pursuant to section 18-1-1001 (1), 13-14-103, 13-14-104.5, or 13-14-106 during the commission of unauthorized absence commits a class 3 felony.
(3) If a parolee placed in a community corrections or in an intensive supervision program pursuant to section 17-27.5-101 has an unauthorized absence, the department of corrections shall notify the appropriate community reentry program described in section 17-33- 101 (7)(a) and provide contact information for the purposes of assisting the person to reengage with supervision.
Source: L. 2020: Entire section added, (HB 20-1019), ch. 9, p. 27, § 10, effective March 6. L. 2021: IP(1) amended, (SB 21-059), ch. 136, p. 724, § 53, effective October 1; (2)(b) amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3199, § 291, effective March 1, 2022. L. 2023: IP(1) amended, (HB 23-1293), ch. 298, p. 1788, § 27, effective October 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2020–2026 · leading case:
v. Pennington, 2021 COA 9 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021).
v. Pennington, 2021 COA 9 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 14× “2020; § 18-8-208.2, C.R.S. 2020. 2 ¶7 After her arrest, Pennington moved to dismiss the felony escape charge, arguing that she was entitled to retroactive application of the Prison Reduction Act and that consequently she could only be charged with unauthorized absence.”
Peo v. Gregory, 2020 COA 162 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 5× “§ 18-8-208.2(1)(a), 2020 Colo. Sess. Laws at 27- 28.”
Peo v. Swayzer (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 6× “¶3 The prosecution charged Swayzer with unauthorized absence in violation of section 18-8-208.2(1)(b), C.R.S. 2024, which prohibits anyone serving an ISP sentence (or one of several other types of sentences) from removing or tampering with their electronic monitoring device.”
Peo v. Geerdes (Colo. Ct. App. 2026).
“See § 18-8-208.2(1)(a), (2)(b), C.R.S. 2025. Such a conviction couldn’t be used to adjudicate a person a habitual criminal today.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-8-208.2(1)(a) — 2 cases
Peo v. Gregory, 2020 COA 162 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020).
“§ 18-8-208.2(1)(a), 2020 Colo. Sess. Laws at 27- 28.”
Peo v. Geerdes (Colo. Ct. App. 2026).
“See § 18-8-208.2(1)(a), (2)(b), C.R.S. 2025. Such a conviction couldn’t be used to adjudicate a person a habitual criminal today.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-8-208.2(1)(b) — 3 cases
Peo v. Gregory, 2020 COA 162 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020).
“§ 18-8-208.2(1)(a), 2020 Colo. Sess. Laws at 27- 28.”
v. Pennington, 2021 COA 9 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021).
“2020; § 18-8-208.2, C.R.S. 2020. 2 ¶7 After her arrest, Pennington moved to dismiss the felony escape charge, arguing that she was entitled to retroactive application of the Prison Reduction Act and that consequently she could only be charged with unauthorized absence.”
Peo v. Swayzer (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
“¶3 The prosecution charged Swayzer with unauthorized absence in violation of section 18-8-208.2(1)(b), C.R.S. 2024, which prohibits anyone serving an ISP sentence (or one of several other types of sentences) from removing or tampering with their electronic monitoring device.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-8-208.2(2)(a) — 1 case
Peo v. Swayzer (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
“¶3 The prosecution charged Swayzer with unauthorized absence in violation of section 18-8-208.2(1)(b), C.R.S. 2024, which prohibits anyone serving an ISP sentence (or one of several other types of sentences) from removing or tampering with their electronic monitoring device.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-8-208.2(2)(b) — 2 cases
Peo v. Gregory, 2020 COA 162 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020).
“§ 18-8-208.2(1)(a), 2020 Colo. Sess. Laws at 27- 28.”
v. Pennington, 2021 COA 9 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021).
“2020; § 18-8-208.2, C.R.S. 2020. 2 ¶7 After her arrest, Pennington moved to dismiss the felony escape charge, arguing that she was entitled to retroactive application of the Prison Reduction Act and that consequently she could only be charged with unauthorized absence.”
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.