Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 42
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-1-101 (2026)

Short title

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

Articles 1 to 4 of this title shall be known and may be cited as the "Uniform Motor Vehicle Law".

Source: L. 94: Entire title amended with relocations, p. 2094, § 1, effective January 1, 1995.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1995–2020 · leading case: People v. Redinger, 906 P.2d 81 (Colo. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Redinger, 906 P.2d 81 (Colo. 1995). · cites it 2× “Because Wise did not see a license plate or temporary sticker on the rear of Redinger's vehicle, he determined that Redinger had violated provisions of the Colorado Uniform Motor Vehicle Law, sections 42-1-101 to XX-X-XXXX, 17 C.R.S.”
People v. Ellison, 14 P.3d 1034 (Colo. 2000). · cites it 2× “[8] The driving under restraint statute itself contains a notice provision that encourages the Division of Motor Vehicles to use reliable methods, such as first-class mail or personal delivery or service, when informing drivers of restraints on their licenses.”
v. Jiron, 2020 COA 36 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “2019, was enacted as part of the Uniform Motor Vehicle Law, see § 42-1-101, C.R.S. 2019, and by its plain terms allows only collateral challenges to alcohol- and drug-related driving offenses.”
Colucci v. Town of Vail, 232 P.3d 218 (Colo. Ct. App. 2009). “Because the CGIA does not define “public roadway,” the trial court turned to the Colorado Uniform Motor Vehicle Law sections 42-1-101 to -4-2204, C.R.S.2009 (UMVL), which defines “roadway” in part as “that portion of a highway .”
Bovard v. People, 99 P.3d 585 (Colo. 2004). “at 150 (holding that violations of restraining orders are punishable by both state statute and municipal ordinance, thus, a '"no-contact' order issued pursuant to a municipal ordinance constitutes a "crime" for purposes of second degree burglary); see also § 42-1-101 et seq.,…”
Garcia v. Huber, 252 P.3d 486 (Colo. Ct. App. 2010). “" A person's drivers' license must be revoked if he or she drove with a BAC of 0.08 or more. See § 42-2-126(8), C.”
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.