|
Adobe Acrobat Reader
version 5 or later is required to view .pdf files
Free Download

If you are
reading this page, it is likely that at some point criminal charges were filed
against you or a law enforcement agency initiated a criminal investigation.
You are likely interested in sealing criminal records - Colorado Springs or
elsewhere in Colorado. Every criminal investigation or criminal prosecution leaves a
paper trail. The fact that no charges were filed, or if filed - that charges
were dismissed or not guilty verdict entered does not erase this paper trail.
If you are eligible to seal criminal justice agency records, several good
reasons for you to act as soon as possible.
If criminal
justice records are not
sealed:
-
You, persons with your written authorization, law enforcement agents,
prosecutors, courts, probation officers and parole officers have access to the records, and
likely the general public.
How difficult is it to
locate criminal records?
Colorado Criminal History Search
or
On-Line
Colorado State Court Litigation History
or
El
Paso County - District & County Court Records Search
Call, write or drop by the local
court - request a name search
Not only is detailed
information available, quite likely the court file is accessible on
demand.
-
If a subsequent criminal
investigation of a similar nature arises, law enforcement officers are more
likely to arrest, and prosecutors are more likely to charge plus less likely
to dismiss or offer a favorable plea agreement. Did it before, did it
again.
-
If subsequent charges are
filed for an offense of a similar nature arises, prosecutors may seek to
introduce evidence of the current investigation or criminal prosecution,
even if charges were not filed at this time or the current case was
dismissed. They may argue admissibility of the current matter under theories of common plan-scheme-design,
identity, modus operandi, motive, guilty knowledge, intent, lack of mistake,
accident, legal justification (self defense, defense of property, lawful
child discipline) or impeachment of witness credibility. While the jury would be instructed as to the
limited purpose for the evidence, jurors may think - Did it before, did it
again.
I've included very brief information regarding admissibility - refer to
Admissibility
Link
If subsequent charges are
filed for an offense of a similar nature arises, prosecutors may seek to
introduce evidence of the current investigation or criminal prosecution at
the time of sentencing even if charges were not filed at this time or the
current case was dismissed. Prosecutors
may attempt use as an aggravating factor - requesting increase the
seriousness of penalties.
You may have
the right to file a separate civil lawsuit in District Court requesting that
criminal justice agency records be sealed. Sealing does not happen automatically.
Courts in El Paso County require a separate civil lawsuit to be filed for each
matter to be sealed.
| MINIMUM
THRESHOLD REQUIRED TO SEAL |
|
please read before calling the attorney |
|
| if the court imposed
sentence, the case is not eligible for sealing |
|
|
The relevant
statute is
CRS
24-72-308 * sealing of criminal justice
agency records - refer to link.
|
| |
|
1. After investigation, the matter was dropped
without filing criminal charges.
|
|
OR
|
| |
|
2.
After prosecution was initiated, all charges in the criminal case were
dismissed. This includes but not limited to evidentiary suppression,
nolle, nolle prosequi, insufficient evidence, dismissal, straight
dismissal, flat dismissal, or successful completion of a
deferred
sentence and subsequent dismissal. |
|
AND
|
|
a. You did not waive your rights to petition to seal
in plea negotiation.
El Paso County DA Office
has a sealing waiver pre-printed into misdemeanor
deferred
sentence agreements. Many felony
deferred
sentence agreements are custom
drafted and contain a similar clause. If such a clause exists, the right to seal
is gone unless perhaps grounds exist for a
collateral attack. Place to begin -
carefully read your
deferred
sentence agreement looking for the word waive, waives,
waived and also
the numbers
CRS
24-72-308. |
|
AND
|
|
b. The dismissal or failure to charge was not the
result of a plea agreement in separate case.
Note: 2004 amendment opens a window if you have been a good lad or
lass. Now the
uncharged offense investigation records or flat dismissal would be eligible for
sealing
15 years after the date of final disposition of all criminal proceedings if no
new criminal charges have been brought during the 15 years.
Word to the wise. DUI, DEAC & DWAI
as well as driving under restraint are classified as misdemeanors - criminal
charges -
as well as some other traffic matters. Exercise care if relevant.
|
|
OR
|
| |
|
3. After prosecution was initiated, a judge or jury
entered a verdict of not guilty on all charges
|
| |
|
|
|
NOTE |
To be
eligible to seal, a case must fall within the above criteria |
|
If you
entered a guilty plea or were found guilty at trial and
the court imposed sentence on any charge, you are not
eligible to seal criminal justice records. If you were sentenced to
probation or received a straight jail sentence on any charge in the case,
no charge in the case is eligible for sealing. If this exists,
please don't call hoping you will hear something different. It never
hurts to obtain a second opinion from a different attorney. |
|
Deferred
sentence is another
matter - refer to above information and the link
|
|
Collateral attack
may
be possible - refer to the link
|
|
If uncertain
of final disposition, refer
to Records & Non-Client
Sealing Eligibility Assessment - Including Self
Help |
|
SEX OFFENDER. Conviction of an
offense for which the factual basis was unlawful sexual behavior as
defined in
CRS 16-22-102(9)
is not eligible for sealing. Refer to
CRS
24-72-308(3)(c). This attorney interprets the
statute to prohibit sealing of any amended charge to which plea is
entered, including records of the original sex offender charge.
Given that a petition to seal would be dismissed by the Court prior to
setting a hearing, I would decline such a request. You may consult
other counsel. |
|
If the entire case was either not
filed, dismissed or not guilty verdict entered as to all counts, feel
free to call or email. |
|
|
| |
| |
2008
PENDING LEGISLATION
SECOND CHANCE LAW |
HB08-1082 is pending
before the Colorado Legislature regarding sealing of
conviction records.
As of 2/18/08 when reviewed, it has not passed and is not
Colorado law. Not yet. Not today.
House Bill Status. |
|
|
| |
|
|

|
FILING - NOTICE
e-Filing
availability and court mandatory requirements |
Initial Court Review: Denial Without Hearing
Upon the filing of a petition, the court shall review the petition and determine
whether there are grounds under this section to proceed to a hearing on the
petition. If the court determines that the petition on its face is
insufficient or if the court determines that, after taking judicial notice of
matters outside the petition, the petitioner is not entitled to relief under
this section, the court shall enter an order denying the petition and mail a
copy of the order to the petitioner. The court's order shall specify the
reasons for the denial of the petition
CRS 24-72-308(1)(b)(II)(A)
Initial Court Review:
Hearing To Be Set
At the time of filing of a petition, if the court does not determine that
grounds exist on the face of the petition at that time for the court to deny the
request to seal, the court is required to set a date for a hearing.
CRS 24-72-308(1)(b)(II)(A)
Initial Notice to Agencies with Records to Seal
If the
court determines that the petition is sufficient on its face and that no other
grounds exist at that time for the court to deny the petition under this
section, the court shall set a date for a hearing and the petitioner shall
notify the prosecuting attorney by certified mail, the arresting agency, and any
other person or agency identified by the petitioner.
CRS 24-72-308(1)(b)(II)(B)
The statutory language is ambiguous. Does the statute require service by certified mail upon all
agencies or just the prosecuting attorney? It makes a great deal of
difference in postage expense and time expended preparing certified mail. Courts in
El Paso County have interpreted the statute to require notice by
certified mail only upon prosecutors, and notice to the remaining agencies with
records to seal may be given via regular U.S. Mail, postage pre-paid, evidenced
by a certificate of mailing. Courts in other counties may differ and
require notice to all agencies by certified mail. 
|
FINAL ORDERS HEARING
TIMING - CRITERIA -
COURT ORDER |
|
|
APPROXIMATE
TIMING
|
|
Attorney has published
documents which facilitate preparation of a retainer agreement and the
lawsuit. |
|
1. Link to
retainer agreement data information sheet. Document is not
password protected. The completed form may be faxed to the
attorney for preparation of a proposed fee agreement. Retainer
agreement will be emailed to prospective client within 1 business day. |
|
2. Link to
sealing lawsuit information sheet. Document is password
protected. Password is provided to a client to expedite
preparation of the petition to seal criminal justice records.
Client may drop off, mail, fax or email the completed information form
to counsel. |
|
3. From the time counsel has received the executed fee agreement,
trust deposit payment and the completed lawsuit information sheet,
within a week to a week and a half, attorney will prepare the petition
to seal criminal justice records and forward to the client in .pdf
format (Adobe Reader ver. 5 or above). |
 |
|
4. When client has executed the petition to seal, the original
document can be returned to counsel via FedX overnight. e-Filing
with the court generally occurs within 1 business day from receipt.
Client's geographic distance need not pose a problem in lawsuit
preparation or e-Filing. |
|
5. e-Filing acceptance frequently occurs within 2-3 business days
from electronic submission; sometimes the same day. At that time,
a case number is available and the Court division has been assigned.
It is then possible to call the division clerk for a hearing date.
Final orders hearing is frequently set approximately 30 days from the
date of setting with the division clerk. |
|
6. From the time client requests representation, it would not be
uncommon to have a final order within approximately 6 weeks. |
|
|
|
|
CRITERIA - SEALING
COURT ORDER |
|
|
|
In
making a determination, the trial court should consider the severity of the
offense sought to be sealed, the time which has elapsed since the conviction,
the subsequent criminal history of the petitioner, and the need for the
government agency to retain the records. D.W.M. v. District Court, 751
P.2d 74 (Colo. 1988); People v. Bushu, 876 P.2d 106 (Colo. App. 1994). The court may also consider factors relating to the strength of the case,
petitioner's age and employment history, and various consequences if the records
are not sealed. The balance test allows for consideration of other factors on a
case-by-case basis. Bushu, supra. |
|
|
|
If after the
hearing is conducted the court finds that the harm to the privacy of the
petitioner or dangers of unwarranted adverse consequences to the petitioner
outweigh the public interest in retaining the records, the court may order such
records to be sealed. By law, basic identification information will not be
sealed.
CRS
24-72-308(1)(c) |
|
|
The statute
indicates the general assembly's intent to preserve the complete criminal
justice record, but in a form that protects the individual named from any
harmful effects. Physical destruction of records not generally allowed. By
fashioning the remedy of sealing records, the general assembly did not intend
that the physical destruction of the records also be allowed in most
situations. People v. Wright, 43 Colo. App. 30, 598 P.2d 157 (1979).
|


|
SEALING
ORDER - NOTICE
method of
serving the final sealing order has significant impact upon cost and upon
probability of compliance - actual sealing
please take the time to review the various options of final order service |
|
|
|
1. A copy of the order is to be
provided to the custodian of record of each agency named in the petition
CRS 24-72-308(1)(b)(II). The Clerk of Court in the sealing
civil case receives notice via the sealing order itself. If records of
a different court are being sealed, notice would have to be given to the
other Court Clerk. e.g. municipal court |
|
2.
Records Custodian Failure to Seal - Misdemeanor.
Any person who willfully and knowingly fails to seal is guilty of a
misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not
more than one hundred dollars, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not
more than ninety days, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
CRS 24-72-309 |
|
|
|
METHOD OF GIVING NOTICE |
|
|
|
3. Four options are exist regarding notice and service of the sealing order
upon the agencies with criminal justice records.
Usually 8 - 14 agencies are named in a petition to
seal. |
|
|
Option 1 - U.S. Mail - Regular Mail.
a. Regular U.S. Mail is the least expensive method of notice. Cost per agency was cheap but expense changed with the advent of
new postal regulations May 14, 2007. Postal rates
changed from weight
based services to shape based services which factor envelope size, thickness,
rigidity and weight.
b. The sealing order is received by the agency in the U.S.
Mail without an individual recipient being named and without evidence of
actual receipt. It may or may not actually be delivered. An attorney's
certificate of mailing would be filed with the court, however there is no evidence to
validate the certificate. Attachment of individual
criminal culpability for failing to seal is unlikely.
c. Although it will not provide the name of the individual to whom the
letter was delivered and may not be admissible evidence of service, USPS delivery confirmation is available for minor
additional cost. Client can obtain confirmation that the sealing order
was delivered, similar to FedX website delivery confirmation.
e. Absent sophisticated mailing equipment,
it may not be possible to determine first
class or parcel postage on oversized, heavy or stuffed envelopes. Physical appearance at the USPS may
likely be
required to mail hard copy final sealing order and notice documents based upon
the weight, rigidity or delivery confirmation. Line queue of 20 - 45 minutes or longer is
frequently encountered for USPS counter service; this would be billable upon a
secretarial
hourly
fee basis.
f. Service by regular U.S. Mail is
not recommended by counsel. This office recommends personal service, but understands client cost
considerations and will use regular U.S. Mail
option upon client instruction. If an agency failed to seal after mailing, further
work to remedy would be billed upon an
hourly
fee basis. Refer to
regular US Mail total
estimated fees & costs. This method of serving the final order is
less expensive than personal
service and is the most commonly used method method of service due to
cost savings.
g. Service Method Upside - Expense Reduction & Safety Net.
For clients desiring to reduce expense, this method (regular U.S. Mail
service) is the only option if the final sealing order is not
personally served on each agency. With the safety net of subsequent
records check referenced in attorney
recommendations below, service of the final sealing order
by regular U.S. Mail is worth considering if initial cost savings is a factor for the prospective
client.
h. Service Method Downside - Potential Additional Fees and Costs.
It is likely that agencies will seal upon receipt of the final sealing order, however counsel can not guarantee.
Given that the client is advised of the risks inherent in regular U.S.
Mail service, if client so elects, additional fees and costs necessitated
by agency dispute, opening the sealed court file, court certification and
alternate service of process would be the billable if an agency fails to
timely seal records.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
|
Option 2 - Personal Service of Process.
a. Service Method Upside - Likelihood of Actual Sealing. A
specific individual is personally served and could incur criminal penalties if
records are not sealed. A proper affidavit of service of process is
filed with the court evidencing receipt of the order. Agencies with
records will likely seal records in their possession.
b. Service Method Downside - Expense. Personal service of process is expensive - estimated $55 per
local agency (Colorado Springs),
$68 for the CBI (Denver) and the FBI (West Virginia) in excess of $100.
In addition to paying a process server, expense for court certification of
the sealing order is doubled - one for the recipient + one for attachment to
the affidavit of service of process. $0.75 per page court copy cost
plus $15 per document court certification fee. Refer to
personal
service total estimated fees & costs below - they are significantly more than
regular U.S. Mail costs.
c. Personal service method of serving a certified copy of the
final order is recommended
by counsel.
d. Link to professional
process
servers.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
|
Option
3 -
e-Filing & Service designation via
Electronic
File and Serve -
Regular U.S. Mail
The option of providing notice to a
third person (agency other than the DA Office) at a street address is not available within LexisNexis e-File &
Serve. Given this fact, this less expensive method of service is simply not possible.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
|
Option 4 - U.S. Mail - Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested.
Significant time expenditure is required for preparation of 8 - 12 certified mail pieces, and
certified mail is costly. It is not uncommon for USPS certified mail
receipts (green cards) to be returned without a date or without signature, and
periodically the green cards are simply not returned. This attorney will
not use certified mail to serve the final sealing order.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
|
FORM OF SEALING ORDER WHICH PROVIDES NOTICE
ORDER - COPY CERTIFIED BY THE COURT OR PLAIN PHOTOCOPY
|
|
4.
Format of the sealing order which will be served upon the agencies with criminal justice records
will take one of two forms.
a. Certified copy of final sealing order.
recommended
Upside - Avoidance of Additional Fees and Costs. An agency with
records to seal is much more likely to comply with the sealing order if a
certified copy has been received. Compliance and agency sealing will avoid
the necessity of unsealing the court file to procure subsequent certified
copies.
Downside - Additional Expense. court expense.
$0.75 per page copy expense plus $15 per document court certification fee.
b. Regular copy of final sealing order - not certified.
not
recommended
Upside - Expense Reduction & Safety Net.
For clients desiring to reduce expenses, photocopying by the attorney is less
costly than the above court copy expense and court
certification fee. With the safety net of
subsequent records check referenced in
attorney
recommendations below, client will determine whether each agency
accepted the regular photocopy and actually sealed records.
Service Method Downside - Potential Additional Fees and Costs. If
an agency refuses to seal records based upon an uncertified photocopy of the
sealing order, billable attorney time will be expended in the dispute and the court file will have been sealed.
Motion and order to unseal the court file will be required to procure a
certified copy. Additional fees and
costs necessitated by agency dispute, opening the sealed court file, court certification and
alternate service of process would be the billable. This constitutes
advisement of the risks. The client will make the election regarding
plain photocopy or copies certified by the court. Common sense
mandates certified copy. don't be penny wise and pound foolish
*
* *
* *
* *
*
|
|
Comment re Option
Explanations The
above options explanations may seem lengthy. It is my
policy to inform clients of all options which impact the client's rights or
finances in order to permit the client to make intelligent, informed
decisions. Method of serving the final sealing order has significant
impact upon cost and upon probability of compliance - actual sealing by
criminal justice agencies which were served with the final sealing order.
*
* *
* *
* *
*
|
|
5. Attorney Recommendations
a. It is this attorney's belief that if a certified copy of the order to seal is
personally served upon the custodian of records with an affidavit of
personal service of process being filed with the court, it is much more likely the
records will in fact be sealed than if the order is simply received by
U.S. Mail - regular mail. This attorney recommends
to clients that process service Option 2 expense be incurred. If
sufficient reason exists to petition to seal in the first place, there is
sufficient reason to use every means possible to actually have the records
sealed by the various agencies.
b. For
clients desiring to reduce expenses, use of
regular U.S. Mail Option 1 above is the only other approach if the
final sealing order is not personally served on each agency. With
the safety net of subsequent records check in ¶5 §c immediately below,
regular U.S. Mail service of the final sealing order is a viable option to
save costs and total client expenditure and is most commonly used in
sealing cases.
c.
Immediately prior to closing file, counsel conducts an on-line check of
Colorado State Courts litigation history and CBI history to ascertain
records are sealed and unavailable. Counsel advises each client to
attempt to procure records from each other agency 30 days after entry of
the sealing order to verify that records are in fact not accessible.
Please refer to the below links for information regarding searching the
FBI "rap sheet" and client records requests to law enforcement agencies.
|
|
|

Upon the entry of an order to seal
the records, the petitioner and all criminal justice agencies may properly
reply, upon any inquiry in the matter, that no such records exist with respect
to such person. An individual may deny his past criminal record.
CRS
24-72-308 clearly allows an individual to deny past criminal involvement if the criminal
record has been sealed pursuant to the statute. D.W.M., supra, Bushu,
supra.
|
POTENTIAL IMPORTANCE TO A PERSON'S FUTURE
|
|
|
|
Employers,
educational institutions, state and local government agencies, officials, and
employees may not, in any application or interview or in any other way,
require an applicant to disclose any information contained in sealed records.
An applicant need not, in answer to any question concerning arrest and
criminal records information that has been sealed, include a reference to or
information concerning such sealed information and may state that no such
action has ever occurred. Such an application may not be denied solely because
of the applicant's refusal to disclose arrest and criminal records information
that has been sealed.
CRS
24-72-308(1)(f)(I)
|
|

Records which are exempt from the statute and may not
be sealed.
CRS
24-72-308(3)
1. Any class 1 or class 2 misdemeanor traffic offense
2. Any class A or class B traffic infraction; or
3. DUI, DEAC or DWAI
4. Conviction records for unlawful sexual behavior
as defined in CRS
18-3-412.5(1)
- registered sex offenders
5. All records when inquiry is made by another criminal
justice agency
Additionally, the DMV is required to keep a separate file of
all abstracts of court records regarding dismissals and lesser alcohol
offense or non-alcohol offense convictions where the original charges
were alcohol or drug related traffic charges, i.e.: DUI, DEAC or DWAI. CRS
42-2-121(2)(b) These separate records are available only to
criminal justice agencies.
Exception to the exception - DUI - DEAC -
DWAI charge - minor under age 21 and BAC below 0.05
42-4-1715. Convictions, judgments, and charges recorded - public inspection.
(1)(a) Every judge of a court not of record and every clerk of a court of record shall keep a full record of every case in which a person is charged with any violation of this article or any other law regulating the operation of vehicles on highways.
(b)
(I) Upon application by a person, the court shall expunge all records concerning a conviction of the person for driving any vehicle in this state with an alcohol level of at least 0.02 but not more than 0.05 grams of alcohol per hundred milliliters of blood or at least 0.02 but not more than 0.05 grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath while under twenty-one years of age pursuant to section 42-4-1301 (2) (a.5) if:
(A) Such person presents a request for expungement to the court and provides all information required by the court to process such request;
(B) Such person is over twenty-one years of age and the court action regarding the offense has been concluded;
(C) The person has not been convicted for any other offense under section 42-4-1301 that was committed while such person was under twenty-one years of age; and
(D) Such person pays the fine and surcharge for such conviction and completes any other requirements of the court with regard to such conviction, including, but not limited to, any order to pay restitution to any party.
(II) Upon receiving a request for expungement, the court may delay consideration of such request until sufficient time has elapsed to ensure that the person is not convicted for any additional offense under section 42-4-1301 committed while the person was under twenty-one years of age.
(2) Within ten days after the entry of a judgment, conviction, or forfeiture of bail of a person upon a charge of violating any provision of this article or other law regulating the operation of vehicles on highways, the judge or clerk of the court in which the entry of a judgment was made or the conviction was had or bail was forfeited shall prepare and immediately forward to the department an abstract of the record of said court covering every case in which said person had a judgment entered against him or her, was so convicted, or forfeited bail, which abstract must be certified by the person so required to prepare the same to be true and correct.
(3) Said abstract must be made upon a form furnished by the department and shall include the name, address, and driver's license number of the party charged, the registration number of the vehicle involved, the nature of the offense, the date of hearing, the plea, the judgment or whether bail forfeited, and the amount of the fine or forfeiture.
(4)(a) Every court of record shall also forward a like report to the department:
(I) Upon the conviction of any person of vehicular homicide or any other felony in the commission of which a vehicle was used; and
(II) Upon the dismissal of a charge for a violation of section 42-4-1301 (1) or (2) or if the original charge was for a violation of section 42-4-1301 (1) or (2) and the conviction was for a non-alcohol- or non-drug-related traffic offense.
(b) Every juvenile court shall forward a like report to the department upon the adjudication of delinquency of any juvenile based upon conduct which would establish vehicular homicide if committed by an adult.
(5) The department shall keep all abstracts received under this section, as well as a record of penalty assessments received, at the main office, and the same shall be public records and subject to the provisions of section 42-1-206.

Prosecutors may subsequently petition the court to
unseal the records. Inspection of the records included in an order sealing
criminal records may thereafter be permitted by the court only upon petition by
the person who is the subject of such records or by the prosecuting attorney and
only for those purposes named in such petition.
CRS
24-72-308(1)(e)


|
FAILURE TO SEAL WHILE STATUTE PERMITS |
In a case
where:
1. The sealing statute was amended
- restricting rights
to seal, and
2. Petitioner's records could have sealed records
under the former statute
3. Under the amended statute, Petitioner did
not meet the criteria to seal records
4. Petitioner failed to request sealing until
after amendment
5. Petitioner did not qualify for sealing under
the new statute - request denied
The court
ruled the opportunity to petition and to have the balancing test applied in a
hearing under this section is not a vested or a substantive right, application
of the amended statute to the petitioner did not violate the constitutional
prohibition against retrospective legislation (law not ex post facto), and the
petition was denied under the new statute. People v. D.K.B., 843 P.2d
1326 (Colo. 1993); E.J.R. v. District Court, County of Boulder, 892
P.2d 222 (Colo. 1995).
The sealing
statute has been amended multiple times, each becoming more restrictive and
limiting the circumstances under which criminal justice agency records can be sealed.
The above cases demonstrate - seal now while you can. If the law is changed
later and you haven't sealed - tough luck - should have acted sooner.
Applicable Maxim:
Recommendation: |
If you snooze, you lose.
If the remedy is available, file the petition to seal criminal justice records now.
|

If you enter
into a deferred sentence
agreement, sentencing is delayed for the period of time
agreed. Upon your satisfactory completion of all conditions of the deferred
sentence, your plea of guilt will be withdrawn and the
deferred
charge(s) will
be dismissed.
1.
All Charges
Deferred and/or Dismissed.
a. If you entered a plea of guilt or nolo
contendere -
no contest (deferred) to the only charge or all charges, the entire case
will be dismissed. This will be done automatically by the Court without
further action on your part so long as you satisfactorily comply with
conditions set forth in your
deferred
sentence agreement. You may be able
seal records of the criminal case.
b. Review your
deferred
sentence agreement. Paragraph
no. 7 of the
deferred
sentence form pre-printed by the El Paso County
District Attorney’s Office contains the following clause:
As a part of this stipulation, the Defendant agrees
to give up any future right he / she may have, whether provided by
CRS
24-72-308 or by any other law, to have the record of this deferred
judgment to be sealed by Court order.
I. If your
deferred
sentence agreement
contains no such waiver clause or the clause was stricken from the
agreement, you may petition to seal criminal justice records.
II. If your
deferred
sentence agreement
does contains such clause, at the time of the plea agreement you waived your
rights to seal, and you are prohibited from petitioning to seal criminal justice
records. The fact you failed to carefully read the agreement will not
likely be sufficient to set the plea aside, and if 6 months has elapsed you
are likely barred by a statute of limitations from bringing a
collateral attack
on the plea.
2.
Plea to
Deferred + Straight Plea of Guilt. If you entered
a plea of guilt or nolo contendere - no contest (deferred) to any charge(s)
and also entered a straight plea of guilt to any charge(s), by statute you are not
eligible to seal records of the case or any charges therein.
Conviction on the straight plea precludes you from sealing.
3. Exceptions. If your case falls into one the
exceptions
noted above, you may not petition to seal records.

|
EVIDENCE
OF PRIOR BAD ACTS
SIMILAR TRANSACTIONS
POTENTIAL USES OF UNSEALED RECORDS |
|
| |
-
CRS
16-10-301 Evidence of
similar transactions - sexual offenses
-
CRS
18-6-810.5 Evidence of similar
transactions - domestic violence
-
CRS
13-90-101 Who may testify
- interest
Impeachment
-
CRS
13-90-106 Testimony -
exceptions
Persons of unsound mind
Children under age 10
testimony permitted in child abuse,
sexual abuse, sexual assault & incest allegations
-
CRS
13-90-107 Privileged
communications
Husband-wife, physician, surgeon,
registered professional nurse, psychologist, clergyman, minister,
priest, rabbi, certified public accountant, CRS
19-1-103(26), victim's advocate
for victim of domestic violence or sexual assault
Many communications which would otherwise
be privileged are no longer privileged when the offense alleged is child
abuse, sexual assault or domestic violence.
-
CRE
404 character evidence not admissible to
prove conduct - exceptions - other crimes, wrongs, or acts
Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts
is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show
that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible
for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent,
preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or
accident.
-
Impeach of a witness' credibility
Felony Convictions
Evidence of prior felony convictions
is admissible to attack the credibility of a defendant who testifies
on his own behalf. People v. Montez, 197 Colo. 126, 589 P.2d
1368 (1979), CRS
13-90-101
Misdemeanor Convictions
A defendant's credibility may not be
impeached by evidence of prior misdemeanor convictions. People v.
Robles, 183 Colo. 4, 514 P.2d 630 (1973).
While evidence of prior misconduct,
including misdemeanor convictions, may be admitted to attack the
veracity of specific testimony by a defendant, People v. Mejia,
188 Colo. 120, 534 P.2d 779 (1975), People v. Terranova, 38
Colo. App. 476, 563 P.2d 363 (1977), impeachment of a defendant
"may not be accomplished by attacking the general character of
the witness." People v. Taylor, 190 Colo. 210, 545 P.2d
703 (1976).
Evidence of prior misdemeanor
convictions involving false statements to police held admissible for
impeachment purposes where focus was on the specific instances of
lying, not on the convictions themselves, and the jury was
instructed to consider the evidence only for the limited purpose of
evaluating the defendant's credibility. People v. Gillis, 883
P.2d 554 (Colo. App. 1994).
Where defense counsel specifically
limited his questioning of the defendant and other character
witnesses to a particular time, introduction of character testimony
limited to his conduct during that particular time did not raise any
inference of untrue testimony concerning defendant's activities
during a previous time. People v. Sasson, 628 P.2d 120 (Colo.
App. 1981), Lutz v. People, 133 Colo. 229, 293 P.2d 646
(1956).
Procedural requirements applicable to
admission of evidence of similar transactions are not applicable
where evidence is introduced to rebut the truth of defendant's
direct testimony. People v. Moore, 693 P.2d 388 (Colo. App.
1984).
|
| *
* *
* *
* *
* |
| |
|
Due to the potential damaging and prejudicial
effect of admitting evidence of prior bad acts or prior transactions, a plethora
of law exists with respect to multiple types of criminal offenses. The
above is but a brief glimpse.
|

|