(1) Except as otherwise provided in part 4 of this article for commercial drivers, no person shall drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state unless such person has been issued a currently valid driver's or minor driver's license or an instruction permit by the department under this article.
(2) No person shall drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state if such person's driver's or minor driver's license has been expired for one year or less and such person has not been issued another such license by the department or by another state or country subsequent to such expiration.
(3) No person shall drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state unless such person has in his or her immediate possession a current driver's or minor driver's license or an instruction permit issued by the department under this article.
(4) No person who has been issued a currently valid driver's or minor driver's license or an instruction permit shall drive a type or general class of motor vehicle upon a highway in this state for which such person has not been issued the correct type or general class of license or permit.
(5) No person who has been issued a currently valid driver's or minor driver's license or an instruction permit shall operate a motor vehicle upon a highway in this state without having such license or permit in such person's immediate possession.
(6) A charge of a violation of subsection (2) of this section shall be dismissed by the court if the defendant elects not to pay the penalty assessment and, at or before the defendant's scheduled court appearance, exhibits to the court a currently valid driver's or minor driver's license.
(7) A charge of a violation of subsection (5) of this section shall be dismissed by the court if the defendant elects not to pay the penalty assessment and, at or before the defendant's scheduled court appearance, exhibits to the court a currently valid license or permit issued to such person or an officially issued duplicate thereof if the original is lost, stolen, or destroyed.
(8) The conduct of a driver of a motor vehicle which would otherwise constitute a violation of this section is justifiable and not unlawful when:
(a) It is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no conduct of said driver and which is of sufficient gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding the injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the injury sought to be prevented by this section; or
(b) The applicable conditions for exemption, as set forth in section 42-2-102, exist.
(9) The issue of justification or exemption is an affirmative defense. As used in this subsection (9), "affirmative defense" means that, unless the state's evidence raises the issue involving the particular defense, the defendant, to raise the issue, shall present some credible evidence on that issue. If the issue involved in an affirmative defense is raised, then the liability of the defendant must be established beyond a reasonable doubt as to that issue as well as all other elements of the traffic infraction.
(10) Any person who violates any provision of subsection (1) or (4) of this section commits a class A traffic infraction. Any person who violates any provision of subsection (2), (3), or (5) of this section commits a class B traffic infraction.
(11) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, a second or subsequent conviction under subsection (1) or (4) of this section, when a person receiving such conviction has not subsequently obtained a valid Colorado driver's license or the correct type or general class of license, shall result in the assessment by the department of six points against the driving privilege of the person receiving such second or subsequent conviction.
Source: L. 94: Entire title amended with relocations, p. 2114, § 1, effective January 1, 1995. L. 2000: (1) to (6) amended, p. 1349, § 14, effective July 1, 2001. L. 2021: (10) amended, (SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3300, § 706, effective March 1, 2022.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
24
cases, 1976–2017 · leading case:
People v. Swain, 959 P.2d 426 (Colo. 1998).
People v. Swain, 959 P.2d 426 (Colo. 1998).
· cites it 8× “(1997), [5] and driving without a driver's license pursuant to section 42-2-101(5), 11 C.R.S. (1997). [6] The case proceeded to jury trial on May 23, 1996, in La Plata County Court.”
Cnty. Court in & for Cty. of El Paso v. Ruth, 575 P.2d 1 (Colo. 1977).
· cites it 6× “[3] Section 42-2-101, C.R.S.1973. [4] Section 18-1-408(2) provides: "(2) If the several offenses are known to the district attorney at the time of commencing the prosecution and were committed within his judicial district, all such offenses upon which the district attorney…”
People v. Meredith, 763 P.2d 562 (Colo. 1988).
· cites it 13× “Clyne and Stark held that sections 42-2-101 and 42-4-1501 do not grant police officers authority to make an arrest for driving without a license.”
People v. Paynter, 955 P.2d 68 (Colo. 1998).
· cites it 2× “[2] In other words, the officer engaged in conduct involving more than non-coercive questioning at a point in time when he possessed no reasonable articulable suspicion of criminal activity.”
People v. Redinger, 906 P.2d 81 (Colo. 1995).
· cites it 2× “§§ 42-2-101(3), 42-3-111(5), 17 C.R.S. (1993); § 10-4-705(1), 4A C.”
United States v. Rubio-Sepulveda, 237 F. Supp. 3d 1116 (D. Colo. 2017).
· cites it 4× “DEFENDANT’S ARREST The Court next addresses Defendant’s contention that his arrest on January 14, 2014, for failing to have a valid Colorado driver’s license constituted an unreasonable seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment; Pursuant to Colo.”
People v. Pinyan, 546 P.2d 488 (Colo. 1976).
· cites it 3× “Section 42-2-101, C.R.S. 1973. Section 42-2-113, C.”
People v. McCormick, 859 P.2d 846 (Colo. 1993).
· cites it 2× “(1973), subsequent prosecution by the state on a charge of driving without a valid license, under section 42-2-101, 17 C.R.S. (1973), which stemmed from the same traffic stop was not precluded under the mandatory joinder provisions of section 18-1-408(2), 8 C.”
Hellman v. Rhodes, 741 P.2d 1258 (Colo. 1987).
· cites it 2× “On November 20,1985, in a non-jury trial in the County Court for El Paso County, Harald Heilman was found guilty of driving without a valid license, § 42-2-101, 17 C.R.S. (1984), and violating the compulsory insurance requirement, § 42-4-1213, 17 C.”
Allen v. Charnes, 674 P.2d 378 (Colo. 1984).
“, sections 42-2-101 (licenses for drivers), 42-2-103 (licenses issued — denied), 42-2-116 (renewal of license), 42-2-119 (department may cancel license), 42-2-123 (authority to suspend license — to deny license), 42-2-124 (period of suspension or revocation), 42-2-127 (right to…”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-101(1) — 7 cases
People v. Paynter, 955 P.2d 68 (Colo. 1998).
“[2] In other words, the officer engaged in conduct involving more than non-coercive questioning at a point in time when he possessed no reasonable articulable suspicion of criminal activity.”
United States v. Rubio-Sepulveda, 237 F. Supp. 3d 1116 (D. Colo. 2017).
“DEFENDANT’S ARREST The Court next addresses Defendant’s contention that his arrest on January 14, 2014, for failing to have a valid Colorado driver’s license constituted an unreasonable seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment; Pursuant to Colo.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-101(10) — 1 case
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-101(3) — 3 cases
People v. Redinger, 906 P.2d 81 (Colo. 1995).
“§§ 42-2-101(3), 42-3-111(5), 17 C.R.S. (1993); § 10-4-705(1), 4A C.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-101(5) — 2 cases
People v. Swain, 959 P.2d 426 (Colo. 1998).
“(1997), [5] and driving without a driver's license pursuant to section 42-2-101(5), 11 C.R.S. (1997). [6] The case proceeded to jury trial on May 23, 1996, in La Plata County Court.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-101(6) — 1 case
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-101(a) — 1 case
Hellman v. Rhodes, 741 P.2d 1258 (Colo. 1987).
“On November 20,1985, in a non-jury trial in the County Court for El Paso County, Harald Heilman was found guilty of driving without a valid license, § 42-2-101, 17 C.R.S. (1984), and violating the compulsory insurance requirement, § 42-4-1213, 17 C.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-101(l) — 1 case
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-101(l)(a) — 1 case
People v. Meredith, 763 P.2d 562 (Colo. 1988).
“Clyne and Stark held that sections 42-2-101 and 42-4-1501 do not grant police officers authority to make an arrest for driving without a license.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 42-2-101(l)(a)(I) — 1 case
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.