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

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-301 (2024)

Legislative declaration

✓ C.R.S. 2024: the 2025 and 2026 sessions are not included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) The general assembly hereby finds and declares that the maintenance, access and dissemination, completeness, accuracy, and sealing of criminal justice records are matters of statewide concern and that, in defining and regulating those areas, only statewide standards in a state statute are workable.

(2) It is further declared to be the public policy of this state that criminal justice agencies shall maintain records of official actions, as defined in this part 3, and that such records shall be open to inspection by any person and to challenge by any person in interest, as provided in this part 3, and that all other records of criminal justice agencies in this state may be open for inspection as provided in this part 3 or as otherwise specifically provided by law.

Source: L. 77: Entire part added, p. 1244, § 1, effective December 31.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Freedom Colorado Info., Inc. v. El Paso Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 196 P.3d 892 (Colo. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Freedom Colorado Info., Inc. v. El Paso Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 196 P.3d 892 (Colo. 2008). · cites it 3× “" § 24-72-301, C.R.S. (2008); Thompson, 181 P.”
People v. D.K.B., 843 P.2d 1326 (Colo. 1993). · cites it 4× “§§ 24-72-301 to -309, 10B C.R.S. (1988). Specifically, we will examine whether the court of appeals erred in holding that the application to convicted persons of the current version of the statute governing the sealing of arrest and criminal records violated the constitutional…”
Harris v. Denver Post Corp., 123 P.3d 1166 (Colo. 2005). · cites it 4× “Harris and Klebold and the Sheriff also contend that the recordings cannot be made available for public inspection under Colorado’s Criminal Justice Records Act (CCJRA), §§ 24-72-301 to -309, C.R.S. (2005). Agreeing with this contention, the District Court for Jefferson County…”
Martinelli v. Dist. Court in & for City, 612 P.2d 1083 (Colo. 1980). · cites it 2× “1225 ), which they consider to have been made applicable to the facts of this case by virtue of section 24-72-204(1)(b), C.”
People v. Wright, 598 P.2d 157 (Colo. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 4× “The question in this appeal is whether a defendant who has successfully completed a period of deferred prosecution culminating in the dismissal of the complaint may have his arrest record physically destroyed or returned to him; or whether the Criminal Justice Records Act, §…”
Gleason v. Jud. Watch, Inc., 2012 COA 76, 292 P.3d 1044. “One example of the expression of such specific intent is the Criminal Justice Records Act, sections 24-72-301 to -809, C.R.S.2011, which addresses the release, and limitations on the release, of records in criminal cases, including criminal justice records held by the courts.”
Brown v. Whitman, 651 F. Supp. 2d 1216 (D. Colo. 2009). · cites it 2× “Instead, the Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act (“CCJRA”), Colo.Rev.Stat. §§ 24-72-301 to — 309, governs the disclosure of “criminal justice records.”
People v. Thompson, 181 P.3d 1143 (Colo. 2008). · cites it 2× “See §§ 24-72-301(2), -803(1), -804(4)(a). Nevertheless, the respondent judge argues that because the factual allegations in the indictment far exceed the essential facts of the charged offenses, the Denver Post seeks access to information that is typically contained in…”
In re The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado v. Regina M. SPRINKLE, 489 P.3d 1242 (Colo. 2021). “See § 24-72-301 ( "The General Assembly hereby finds and declares that the .”
E.J.R. v. Dist. Court, 892 P.2d 222 (Colo. 1995). · cites it 2× “[4] The Criminal Justice Records Act was enacted by the Colorado Legislature in 1977 and includes the Sealing Statute at §§ 24-72-301 to -309 C.R.S., which allows for the sealing of records regarding criminal proceedings.”
Off. of the State Court Adm'r v. Background Info. Servs., Inc., 994 P.2d 420 (Colo. 1999). “(1999), and sections 24-72-301 to -309, 7 C.R.S. (1999), mandates that a custodian of records manipulate a record or electronic data that contains both confidential and nonconfidential information, in order to create another version of the record or electronic data not…”
Gazette v. Erik Bourgerie, 2024 CO 78, 560 P.3d 964. · cites it 3× “POST countered that the requests were for criminal justice records and thus governed by the Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act ("CCJRA"), §§ 24-72-301 to -309, C.R.S. (2024), not CORA.”
Show all 30 citing cases →
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-301(1): 4 cases
People v. Wright, 598 P.2d 157 (Colo. Ct. App. 1979). “The question in this appeal is whether a defendant who has successfully completed a period of deferred prosecution culminating in the dismissal of the complaint may have his arrest record physically destroyed or returned to him; or whether the Criminal Justice Records Act, §…”
Harris v. Denver Post Corp., 123 P.3d 1166 (Colo. 2005). “Harris and Klebold and the Sheriff also contend that the recordings cannot be made available for public inspection under Colorado’s Criminal Justice Records Act (CCJRA), §§ 24-72-301 to -309, C.R.S. (2005). Agreeing with this contention, the District Court for Jefferson County…”
Land Owners United, LLC v. Waters, 293 P.3d 86 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011).
F.M. v. People, 298 P.3d 991 (Colo. Ct. App. 2011).
Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-301(2): 9 cases
Freedom Colorado Info., Inc. v. El Paso Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 196 P.3d 892 (Colo. 2008). “" § 24-72-301, C.R.S. (2008); Thompson, 181 P.”
Martinelli v. Dist. Court in & for City, 612 P.2d 1083 (Colo. 1980). “1225 ), which they consider to have been made applicable to the facts of this case by virtue of section 24-72-204(1)(b), C.”
People v. Thompson, 181 P.3d 1143 (Colo. 2008). “See §§ 24-72-301(2), -803(1), -804(4)(a). Nevertheless, the respondent judge argues that because the factual allegations in the indictment far exceed the essential facts of the charged offenses, the Denver Post seeks access to information that is typically contained in…”
Harris v. Denver Post Corp., 123 P.3d 1166 (Colo. 2005). “Harris and Klebold and the Sheriff also contend that the recordings cannot be made available for public inspection under Colorado’s Criminal Justice Records Act (CCJRA), §§ 24-72-301 to -309, C.R.S. (2005). Agreeing with this contention, the District Court for Jefferson County…”
Gazette v. Erik Bourgerie, 2024 CO 78, 560 P.3d 964. “POST countered that the requests were for criminal justice records and thus governed by the Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act ("CCJRA"), §§ 24-72-301 to -309, C.R.S. (2024), not CORA.”
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.