Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 24
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50-125 (2026)

Disciplinary proceedings - appeals - hearings - procedure - definitions

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

(1) A person certified to any class or position in the state personnel system may be dismissed, suspended, or otherwise disciplined by the appointing authority upon written findings of failure to comply with standards of efficient service or competence or for willful misconduct, willful failure or inability to perform his duties, or final conviction of a felony or any other offense which involves moral turpitude, or written charges thereof may be filed by any person with the appointing authority, which shall be promptly determined. In considering the conviction of a crime, the board shall be governed by the provisions of section 24-5-101.

(1.5) (a) In considering any disciplinary action pursuant to this section against an employee who is certified to any class or position in the state personnel system for engaging in violent behavior or a threat of violent behavior against another person while on duty, the appointing authority shall give predominant weight to the safety of the other person over the interests of the employee. For purposes of this subsection (1.5), "violent behavior" means any act or threat of physical, verbal, or psychological aggression or the destruction or abuse of property by any individual. A threat may include a veiled, conditional, or direct threat in verbal, written, electronic, or gestural form, resulting in intimidation, harassment, harm, or endangerment to the safety of another person or property.

(b) If the appointing authority finds that the employee has engaged in violent behavior or a threat of violent behavior against another person, the appointing authority may take such disciplinary action as the appointing authority deems appropriate, up to and including termination, taking into consideration the harm or risk of harm to the person created by the employee's actions. Nothing in this subsection (1.5)(b) affects the constitutional or statutory due process rights afforded to an employee who is certified to any class or position in the state personnel system.

(c) This subsection (1.5) applies regardless of whether the employee has been charged with or convicted of a crime.

(2) Any certified employee disciplined under subsection (1) of this section shall be notified in writing by the appointing authority, by certified letter or hand delivery, no later than five days following the effective date of the action, of the action taken, the specific charges giving rise to such action, and the employee's right of appeal to the board. The notice shall include a statement setting forth the time limit for filing an appeal with the board, the address of the board, the requirement that the appeal be in writing, and the availability of a standard appeal form. Upon failure of the appointing authority to notify the employee in accordance with this subsection (2), the employee shall be compensated in full for the five-day period and until proper notification is received.

(3) Within ten days after the receipt of the notification required by subsection (2) of this section or within such additional time as may be permitted by the board in unusual cases for good cause shown, the employee may petition the board for a hearing upon the action taken. Upon receipt of such petition, the board shall grant a hearing to the employee. If the employee fails to petition the board within ten days or within such additional time granted by the board, the action of the appointing authority shall be final and not further reviewable.

(4) The hearing shall be held within ninety days of receipt of the employee's appeal pursuant to the provisions of section 24-50-125.4. The employee shall be entitled to representation of his or her own choosing at his or her own expense, consistent with the rules of the Colorado supreme court concerning the unauthorized practice of law. The board shall cause a verbatim record of the proceedings to be taken and shall maintain the record. At the conclusion of the hearing, but not later than forty-five days after the conclusion of the hearing, the board shall make public written findings of fact and conclusions of law affirming, modifying, or reversing the action of the appointing authority, and the appointing authority shall thereupon promptly execute the findings of the board.

(5) In addition, upon request by the employee or the employee's representative and within the period provided in section 24-50-125.4 (2), the board shall hold a hearing on an appeal for any certified employee in the state personnel system who protests any action taken that adversely affects the employee's current base pay as defined by board rule, status, or tenure. A probationary employee shall be entitled to all the same rights to a hearing as a certified employee; except that such probationary employee shall not have the right to a hearing to review any disciplinary action taken pursuant to subsection (1) of this section while a probationary employee. This subsection (5) shall not apply to appeals brought pursuant to section 24-50-104.

(6) Disciplinary hearings shall be limited to those specified in this section.

(7) Failure, without good cause, of an employee or his representative to appear at a hearing shall be deemed a withdrawal of his appeal, and the action of the appointing authority shall be final. Failure, without good cause, of the appointing authority or his representative to appear at a hearing shall be deemed cause to dismiss the case and to award the employee all rights, salaries, and benefits as though the employee had won the appeal.

Source: L. 72: R&RE, p. 173, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 26-1-25. L. 73: p. 518, § 22. L. 77:

(5) amended, p. 1221, § 3, effective August 2. L. 81: (6) added, p. 1202, § 21, effective July 1. L. 83: (4) amended, p. 985, § 1, effective May 16; (5) amended, p. 852, § 6, effective May 31. L. 84: (4) and (5) amended and (7) added, p. 712, § 10, effective July 1. L. 93: (5) amended, p. 19, § 3, effective March 4. L. 2005: (2), (4), and (5) amended, p. 634, § 3, effective May 27. L. 2020: (1.5) added, (HB 20-1153), ch. 109, p. 439, § 4, effective June 16.

Cross references: (1) For protection of state employees from disciplinary actions under certain circumstances, see article 50.5 of this title.

(2) For the legislative declaration in HB 20-1153, see section 1 of chapter 109, Session Laws of Colorado 2020.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Dep't of Institutions, Div. for Developmental Disabilities, Wheat Ridge Reg'l Ctr. v. Kinchen, 886 P.2d 700 (Colo. 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dep't of Institutions, Div. for Developmental Disabilities, Wheat Ridge Reg'l Ctr. v. Kinchen, 886 P.2d 700 (Colo. 1994). · cites it 62× “Section 24-50-125 tracks the language of the constitution that an employee has a right to appeal.”
Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (1985). · cites it 2× “1984-1985) (hearing within 30 days, decision within 30 days of hearing); Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50-125 (4) (Supp. 1984) (hearing within 45 days, decision within 45 days of hearing); Conn.”
v. Dep't of Corr., 2019 COA 10 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 15× “We disagree and find more persuasive and binding our supreme court’s analysis of section 24-50-125 and its conclusion that only a de novo hearing can properly protect a certified employee’s property interests.”
Renteria v. Colorado State Dep't of Pers., 811 P.2d 797 (Colo. 1991). · cites it 9× “By written order, the district court held that the agency action was controlled by section 24-50-104 which governs allocation decisions and not by section 24-50-125,10B C.R.S. (1988), which governs disciplinary actions; the procedures contained in section 24-50-104(3)(g) were…”
Hughes v. Dep't of Higher Educ., 934 P.2d 891 (Colo. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 18× “" Section 24-50-125, C.R.S. (1988 Repl.Vol.”
State Pers. Bd. v. Gigax, 659 P.2d 693 (Colo. 1983). · cites it 13× “The Board denied his request because it was not filed within the ten-day period specified in section 24-50-125(3), C.R.S. 1973: “(3) Within ten days after the receipt of the notification required by subsection (2) of this section or within such additional time as may be…”
Dep't of Health v. Donahue, 690 P.2d 243 (Colo. 1984). · cites it 2× “See also § 24-50-125, 10 C.R.S. (1982 & 1984 Supp.”
Teigen v. Renfrow, 511 F.3d 1072 (10th Cir. 2007). “A person certified to any class or position in the personnel system may be dismissed, suspended, or otherwise disciplined by the appointing authority upon written findings of failure to comply with standards of efficient service or competence, or for willful misconduct, willful…”
Kinchen v. Dep't of Institutions, 867 P.2d 8 (Colo. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 8× “Disciplinary proceedings are governed by § 24-50-125, C.R.S. (1988 Repl.Vol. 10A).”
Lang v. Colorado Mental Health Inst. in Pueblo, 44 P.3d 262 (Colo. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 3× “Plaintiff appealed his termination to the State Personnel Board (the Board), pursuant to § 24-50-125, C.R.S. 2000. The Board found plaintiffs termination wrongful and ordered his reinstatement with back pay and benefits.”
Bourie v. Dep't of Higher Educ., 929 P.2d 18 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 6× “Section 24-50-125, C.R.S. (1988 Repl.Vol.”
Rice v. Departments of Corr., 950 P.2d 676 (Colo. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “1997, states that the board shall adopt a uniform grievance procedure to be used for employees in the state personnel system and that: “The grievance procedure shall provide an orderly system of review for all grievances, except those arising under section 24-50-125.”
Show all 35 citing cases →
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50-125(1) — 9 cases
Dep't of Institutions, Div. for Developmental Disabilities, Wheat Ridge Reg'l Ctr. v. Kinchen, 886 P.2d 700 (Colo. 1994). “Section 24-50-125 tracks the language of the constitution that an employee has a right to appeal.”
Teigen v. Renfrow, 511 F.3d 1072 (10th Cir. 2007). “A person certified to any class or position in the personnel system may be dismissed, suspended, or otherwise disciplined by the appointing authority upon written findings of failure to comply with standards of efficient service or competence, or for willful misconduct, willful…”
Sussman v. Univ. of Colorado Health Sciences Ctr., 706 P.2d 443 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985).
Bishop v. Dep't of Institutions, Div. of Youth Servs., 831 P.2d 506 (Colo. Ct. App. 1992).
Hoffler v. Colorado Dep't of Corr., 27 P.3d 371 (Colo. 2001).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50-125(2) — 9 cases
Dep't of Institutions, Div. for Developmental Disabilities, Wheat Ridge Reg'l Ctr. v. Kinchen, 886 P.2d 700 (Colo. 1994). “Section 24-50-125 tracks the language of the constitution that an employee has a right to appeal.”
Renteria v. Colorado State Dep't of Pers., 811 P.2d 797 (Colo. 1991). “By written order, the district court held that the agency action was controlled by section 24-50-104 which governs allocation decisions and not by section 24-50-125,10B C.R.S. (1988), which governs disciplinary actions; the procedures contained in section 24-50-104(3)(g) were…”
Rice v. Departments of Corr., 950 P.2d 676 (Colo. Ct. App. 1997). “1997, states that the board shall adopt a uniform grievance procedure to be used for employees in the state personnel system and that: “The grievance procedure shall provide an orderly system of review for all grievances, except those arising under section 24-50-125.”
v. Dep't of Corr., 2019 COA 10 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). “We disagree and find more persuasive and binding our supreme court’s analysis of section 24-50-125 and its conclusion that only a de novo hearing can properly protect a certified employee’s property interests.”
Sussman v. Univ. of Colorado Health Sciences Ctr., 706 P.2d 443 (Colo. Ct. App. 1985).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50-125(3) — 12 cases
Dep't of Institutions, Div. for Developmental Disabilities, Wheat Ridge Reg'l Ctr. v. Kinchen, 886 P.2d 700 (Colo. 1994). “Section 24-50-125 tracks the language of the constitution that an employee has a right to appeal.”
State Pers. Bd. v. Gigax, 659 P.2d 693 (Colo. 1983). “The Board denied his request because it was not filed within the ten-day period specified in section 24-50-125(3), C.R.S. 1973: “(3) Within ten days after the receipt of the notification required by subsection (2) of this section or within such additional time as may be…”
Kinchen v. Dep't of Institutions, 867 P.2d 8 (Colo. Ct. App. 1993). “Disciplinary proceedings are governed by § 24-50-125, C.R.S. (1988 Repl.Vol. 10A).”
Salas v. State Pers. Bd., 775 P.2d 57 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989).
v. Dep't of Corr., 2019 COA 10 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). “We disagree and find more persuasive and binding our supreme court’s analysis of section 24-50-125 and its conclusion that only a de novo hearing can properly protect a certified employee’s property interests.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50-125(4) — 5 cases
Dep't of Institutions, Div. for Developmental Disabilities, Wheat Ridge Reg'l Ctr. v. Kinchen, 886 P.2d 700 (Colo. 1994). “Section 24-50-125 tracks the language of the constitution that an employee has a right to appeal.”
v. Dep't of Corr., 2019 COA 10 (Colo. Ct. App. 2019). “We disagree and find more persuasive and binding our supreme court’s analysis of section 24-50-125 and its conclusion that only a de novo hearing can properly protect a certified employee’s property interests.”
DOC v. Stiles, 2020 CO 90 (Colo. 2020).
Rose v. Dep't of Institutions, 826 P.2d 379 (Colo. Ct. App. 1991).
Colorado Dept. of Human Servs. v. Maggard, 248 P.3d 708 (Colo. 2011).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50-125(5) — 8 cases
Hughes v. Dep't of Higher Educ., 934 P.2d 891 (Colo. Ct. App. 1997). “" Section 24-50-125, C.R.S. (1988 Repl.Vol.”
Dep't of Health v. Donahue, 690 P.2d 243 (Colo. 1984). “See also § 24-50-125, 10 C.R.S. (1982 & 1984 Supp.”
Lucero v. Dep't of Institutions, Div. of Developmental Disabilities, 942 P.2d 1246 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996).
Velasquez v. Dep't of Higher Educ., 93 P.3d 540 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003).
Williams v. Colorado Dep't of Corr., 926 P.2d 110 (Colo. Ct. App. 1996).
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-50-125(8) — 1 case
Berumen v. Dep't of Human Servs., Wheat Ridge Reg'l Ctr., 304 P.3d 601 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012).
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.