Seal Criminal Records
Home Up

 

 

GUSTAFSON LAW OFFICE
SEALING COLORADO CRIMINAL JUSTICE RECORDS

WELCOME Phone (719) 260-1002 Fax (719) 260-1003 

perhaps I will become your attorney
Address  *  Maps  *  Directions
 

Robert D. Gustafson  *  Attorney at Law  *  Colorado Springs
Business Hours  *  Attorney Availability  *  Trade Area
 
Toll Free (800) 410-1002
 
 
SEALING COLORADO CRIMINAL RECORDS
COLORADO SPRINGS CRIMINAL DEFENSE
Colorado Springs - felony offenses * misdemeanor offenses * petty offenses
sealing court records - prosecution records - law enforcement or police records
Colorado traffic & criminal trial practice 25+ years Colorado State Courts & Colorado Springs Municipal Court
MINIMUM THRESHOLD TO SEAL

please read before calling the attorney

ELIGIBILITY ASSESSMENT

please read before calling the attorney

WARNING GENERAL INFORMATION e-FILING FILING - NOTICE SEALING ORDER NOTICE STATUTE
FINAL HEARING - TIMING - CRITERIA - COURT ORDER SEALING ORDER - EFFECT
Potential Importance to a Person's Future
EXCEPTIONS TO SEALING OBTAINING COURT RECORDS
UNSEALED RECORDS USES UNSEALING RECORDS EMPLOYMENT LAW NOT OFFERED
FAILURE TO SEAL
WHILE STATUTE PERMITS
DEFERRED SENTENCE DISPOSITION
EFFECT ON SEALING RECORDS
SERVING FINAL ORDER - COST OPTIONS RECORDS REQUEST FORMS FBI RAPSHEET INFORMATION
ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS DO I NEED AN ATTORNEY? SELF HELP - LEGAL FORMS
ATTORNEY POLICIES
Attorney Representation & Declined Matters
Legal Advice to Clients - Not General Public
Pro Bono Representation or Installment Payment
Representation Now - Another Attorney or Self
Post Sentencing - Revocation or Appeal
Cases Outside Colorado Springs - Travel
 

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

GENERAL INFORMATION

        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:

  1.         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.

  2.         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.

  3.         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

 
ATTORNEY RECOMMENDATIONS SYNOPSIS OF TOTAL FEES & COSTS  RECORDS REQUESTS

 
        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.  A
bsent 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.
 

FBI Records Access Generic Law Enforcement Agency Records Request Form
FBI Records Request Information FBI Records Request Form CBI Records Request Form
links to FBI information available to general public records request forms restricted to clients - call or email for password
   
OPTIONS RE SERVICE OF FINAL SEALING ORDER
SYNOPSIS OF TOTAL FEES & COSTS

ATTORNEY'S FEE - ALL OPTIONS BEFORE COSTS

OPTION 1
REGULAR U.S. MAIL
TOTAL FEES & COSTS ESTIMATE
not
recommended - commonly utilized
OPTION 2
PERSONAL SERVICE
TOTAL FEES & COSTS ESTIMATE
recommended
OPTION 3
COURT e-FILE & SERVE
NOT AVAILABLE FROM COURT
OPTION 4
CERTIFIED U.S. MAIL
NOT AVAILABLE  WITH ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY'S FEE
attorney fee before costs
ELIGIBILITY ASSESSMENT
please read before calling counsel
MINIMUM THRESHOLD TO SEAL
please read before calling counsel

SEALING ORDER - EFFECT

        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)

EXCEPTIONS TO SEALING

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.

UNSEALING RECORDS

        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.

DEFERRED SENTENCE DISPOSITION
EFFECT ON SEALING RECORDS

        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

 
  1. CRS 16-10-301   Evidence of similar transactions - sexual offenses

  2. CRS 18-6-810.5  Evidence of similar transactions - domestic violence

  3. CRS 13-90-101   Who may testify - interest
            Impeachment

  4. 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

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.