Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 2
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203 (2026)

Ambiguous statutes - aids in construction

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

(1) If a statute is ambiguous, the court, in determining the intention of the general assembly, may consider among other matters:

(a) The object sought to be attained;

(b) The circumstances under which the statute was enacted;

(c) The legislative history, if any;

(d) The common law or former statutory provisions, including laws upon the same or similar subjects;

(e) The consequences of a particular construction;

(f) The administrative construction of the statute;

(g) The legislative declaration or purpose.

Source: L. 73: R&RE, p. 1424, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 135-1-203.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 266 cases (43 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: v. Dominguez, 2021 COA 76 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
v. Dominguez, 2021 COA 76 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 4× “§ 2-4-203, C.R.S. 2020; Frazier v. People, 90 P.”
Samuel Perez v. By the Rockies, LLC, & Duane Layton, 2023 COA 109 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 4× “2023; see also § 2-4-203, C.R.S. 2023. 15 1, 2019-Dec. 31, 2019), https://perma.”
Robbins v. People, 107 P.3d 384 (Colo. 2005). · cites it 4× “See § 2-4-203, C.R.S. (2004); Schubert v. People, 698 P.”
In Re the Marriage of Ikeler, 161 P.3d 663 (Colo. 2007). · cites it 4× “3d at 1015 ; § 2-4-203, C.R.S. (2006). Our task is to choose a construction that gives effect to the legislature's intent and that serves the purpose of the overall statutory scheme.”
In re the Marriage of Vittetoe, 2016 COA 71 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “§ 2-4-203(1), C.R.S. 2015; see also Vensor v.”
v. Spalding Rehab., 2019 COA 93 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “See § 2-4-203, C.R.S. 2018; Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs v.”
Hurtado v. Brady, 165 P.3d 871 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “3d at 661 ; see § 2-4-203, C.R.S.2006. A statute is ambiguous if it is susceptible of more than one interpretation.”
Alamosa-La Jara Water Users Prot. Ass'n v. Gould, 674 P.2d 914 (Colo. 1983). · cites it 13× “The water court supported its reading of the compact by reference to the compact’s legislative history as well as the other factors set forth in section 2-4-203, C.R.S. (1980 Repl.Vol. IB).”
Simon v. Coppola, 876 P.2d 10 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “When the words are susceptible of more than one meaning or leave their scope unclear, we derive the public policy being conveyed and its scope in part from the statute's historical context, see § 2-4-203, C.R.S. (1980 Repl. Vol. 1B), and in part from the assumption that the…”
State v. Nieto, 993 P.2d 493 (Colo. 2000). · cites it 4× “See § 2-4-203, 1 C.R.S. (1999); see, e.g., Colby, 928 P.”
Gorman v. Tucker by & Through Edwards, 961 P.2d 1126 (Colo. 1998). · cites it 8× “See § 2-4-203(1)(a)-(g), 1 C.R.S. (1997). A statute must be read and considered as a whole and should be construed to give consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect to all of its parts.”
People v. Opana, 2017 CO 56 (Colo. 2017). · cites it 4× “However, to the extent that the language of a statute is susceptible of more than one reasonable interpretation, and is therefore considered ambiguous, a substantial body of interpretive aids, either provided by the legislature to explain its own drafting conventions and…”
Show all 266 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(1) — 34 cases
In re the Marriage of Vittetoe, 2016 COA 71 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016). “§ 2-4-203(1), C.R.S. 2015; see also Vensor v.”
Lobato v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 105 P.3d 220 (Colo. 2005).
Marsh v. People, 389 P.3d 100 (Colo. 2017).
People v. Lovato, 357 P.3d 212 (Colo. Ct. App. 2014).
Lewis v. Taylor, 2016 CO 48 (Colo. 2016).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(1)(a) — 24 cases
State Eng'r v. Castle Meadows, Inc., 856 P.2d 496 (Colo. 1993).
Kazadi v. People, 291 P.3d 16 (Colo. 2012).
A.S. v. People, 312 P.3d 168 (Colo. 2013).
Trujillo v. Colorado Div. of Ins., 320 P.3d 1208 (Colo. 2014).
Pennobscot, Inc. v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 642 P.2d 915 (Colo. 1982).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(1)(b) — 3 cases
Woodsmall v. Reg'l Transp. Dist., 800 P.2d 63 (Colo. 1990).
Harris v. Denver Post Corp., 123 P.3d 1166 (Colo. 2005).
United States v. Durango & Silverton Narrow Gauge R.R. Co., The (D. Colo. 2020).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(1)(c) — 24 cases
People v. Tillery, 231 P.3d 36 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009).
Samuel Perez v. By the Rockies, LLC, & Duane Layton, 2023 COA 109 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023). “2023; see also § 2-4-203, C.R.S. 2023. 15 1, 2019-Dec. 31, 2019), https://perma.”
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. McMichael, 906 P.2d 92 (Colo. 1995).
Vigil v. Franklin, 103 P.3d 322 (Colo. 2004).
Battle North, LLC v. Sensible Hous. Co., 370 P.3d 238 (Colo. Ct. App. 2015).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(1)(d) — 7 cases
v. Berry, 2020 CO 14 (Colo. 2020).
People v. Bostelman, 141 P.3d 891 (Colo. Ct. App. 2006).
Stresscon Corp. v. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am., 373 P.3d 615 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).
People v. Trujillo, 983 P.2d 124 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).
Com. Rsch., LLC v. Roup, 353 P.3d 859 (Colo. Ct. App. 2013).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(1)(e) — 23 cases
Samuel Perez v. By the Rockies, LLC, & Duane Layton, 2023 COA 109 (Colo. Ct. App. 2023). “2023; see also § 2-4-203, C.R.S. 2023. 15 1, 2019-Dec. 31, 2019), https://perma.”
Gorman v. Tucker by & Through Edwards, 961 P.2d 1126 (Colo. 1998). “See § 2-4-203(1)(a)-(g), 1 C.R.S. (1997). A statute must be read and considered as a whole and should be construed to give consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect to all of its parts.”
A.S. v. People, 312 P.3d 168 (Colo. 2013).
Colorado Common Cause v. Meyer, 758 P.2d 153 (Colo. 1988).
Colorado Ethics Watch v. Indep. Ethics Comm'n, 369 P.3d 270 (Colo. 2016).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(1)(f) — 3 cases
Udis v. Universal Commc'ns Co., 56 P.3d 1177 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).
Yen, LLC v. Jefferson Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 2021 COA 107 (Colo. Ct. App. 2021).
People v. Patton, 425 P.3d 1152 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(1)(g) — 5 cases
People v. Rivera, 56 P.3d 1155 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).
Dunlap v. Colorado Springs Cablevision, Inc., 829 P.2d 1286 (Colo. 1992).
Lopez v. City of Grand Junction, 2018 COA 97 (Colo. Ct. App. 2018).
Martinez v. Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Comm'n, 2017 COA 37 (Colo. Ct. App. 2017).
Bohanan v. Esurance Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. (Colo. Ct. App. 2026).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(8) — 1 case
Durango Transp., Inc. v. City of Durango, 786 P.2d 428 (Colo. Ct. App. 1990).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(a) — 2 cases
Mountain City Meat Co. v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 904 P.2d 1333 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).
Alvarado v. People, 132 P.3d 1205 (Colo. 2006).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(b) — 1 case
Smith v. Zufelt Ex Rel. Zufelt, 880 P.2d 1178 (Colo. 1994).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(c) — 2 cases
Buckley v. Chilcutt, 968 P.2d 112 (Colo. 1998).
Baked, LLC v. GJG Prop., LLC, 2020 COA 51 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(d) — 2 cases
People v. Mena, 2025 COA 14 (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
Bickel v. City of Boulder, 885 P.2d 215 (Colo. 1994).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(e) — 1 case
Buckley v. Chilcutt, 968 P.2d 112 (Colo. 1998).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(g) — 2 cases
People ex rel. D. L. E., 645 P.2d 271 (Colo. 1982).
People in Interest of DLE, 645 P.2d 271 (Colo. 1982).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(l)(a) — 17 cases
Pennobscot, Inc. v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 642 P.2d 915 (Colo. 1982).
State v. Nieto, 993 P.2d 493 (Colo. 2000). “See § 2-4-203, 1 C.R.S. (1999); see, e.g., Colby, 928 P.”
Griffin v. SW Devanney & Co., Inc., 775 P.2d 555 (Colo. 1989).
Farmers Ins. Exch. v. Bill Boom Inc., 961 P.2d 465 (Colo. 1998).
Triad Painting Co. v. Blair, 812 P.2d 638 (Colo. 1991).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(l)(b) — 1 case
Marquez v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 620 P.2d 29 (Colo. 1980).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(l)(c) — 8 cases
People v. Terry, 791 P.2d 374 (Colo. 1990).
Griffin v. SW Devanney & Co., Inc., 775 P.2d 555 (Colo. 1989).
Fishburn v. City of Colorado Springs, 919 P.2d 847 (Colo. Ct. App. 1995).
Douglas Cnty. Bd. of Equalization v. Fid. Castle Pines, Ltd., 890 P.2d 119 (Colo. 1995).
In Re the Marriage of Parker, 886 P.2d 312 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(l)(d) — 5 cases
Colorado Comp. Ins. Auth. v. Jones, 131 P.3d 1074 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005).
Griffin v. SW Devanney & Co., Inc., 775 P.2d 555 (Colo. 1989).
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. City of Aurora, 62 P.3d 1049 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).
Martin v. Montezuma-Cortez Sch. Dist. RE-1, 809 P.2d 1010 (Colo. Ct. App. 1990).
Calhan Sch. Dist. 1 v. El Paso Cnty., 686 P.2d 1321 (Colo. 1984).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(l)(e) — 9 cases
Stephen v. City & Cnty. of Denver, 659 P.2d 666 (Colo. 1983).
Gorman v. Tucker by & Through Edwards, 961 P.2d 1126 (Colo. 1998). “See § 2-4-203(1)(a)-(g), 1 C.R.S. (1997). A statute must be read and considered as a whole and should be construed to give consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect to all of its parts.”
In Re the Marriage of Dureno, 854 P.2d 1352 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).
Douglas Cnty. Bd. of Equalization v. Fid. Castle Pines, Ltd., 890 P.2d 119 (Colo. 1995).
Woodsmall v. Reg'l Transp. Dist., 800 P.2d 63 (Colo. 1990).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(l)(f) — 4 cases
City of Lakewood v. Mavromatis, 817 P.2d 90 (Colo. 1991).
Krieg v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 686 P.2d 1331 (Colo. 1984).
Safeway Stores 44 Inc. v. Indus. Claim Appeals Off., 973 P.2d 677 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998).
Calhan Sch. Dist. 1 v. El Paso Cnty., 686 P.2d 1321 (Colo. 1984).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 2-4-203(l)(g) — 2 cases
Dunlap v. Colorado Springs Cablevision, Inc., 829 P.2d 1286 (Colo. 1992).
Vail Assocs., Inc. v. Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 765 P.2d 593 (Colo. Ct. App. 1988).
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.