Jurisdiction and venue  -  municipal courts have concurrent jurisdiction for offenses involving a thing of value less than $100. CRS 18-4-401(8)

        A shoplifting offense occurring within the city limits of Colorado Springs or any other town may be charged in the municipal court if the thing of value is less than $100, or charges may be brought in the state court.  Where the alleged offense occurs outside the city limits in the unincorporated county, a shoplifting offense must be charged in state court.  Regardless of location of alleged theft, where the thing of value is $100 or more, a shoplifting offense must be charged in state court.

        Theft covers numerous criminal allegations; not all can be addressed in this webpage.

        Depending upon the value of the property alleged to have been stolen, charges may be misdemeanor offense or felony offense.  The state legislature has eliminated petty offense theft which was previously tagged at $250 or less - theft of a nominal value item is more serious now.

        Theft is classified based upon the thing of value as follows:

        In shoplifting and smaller misdemeanor 2 theft cases, the primary focus of a defendant's attention should not be potential sentencing sanctions, but upon non-judicial potential long term consequences and potential remedy.  Shoplifting or theft, even allegation of a small dollar value, is a crime of dishonesty.  Theft charges may likely impact a person's ability to seek, procure or retain employment, security clearance, professional licensing or retention, weapons licensing, visa for international travel and the like.  Whether or not criminal justice records are eligible for sealing may likely be the determining factor in a client's decision to accept or reject any plea offer.

        To avoid potential future, unintended consequences which flow from a crime of dishonesty, a defendant must ultimately seal criminal justice records.  A shoplifting criminal case can only be eligible for sealing upon one of the following circumstances.

        Naturally, second or subsequent charges or felony charges increase the complexity of a case and the increase the potential for jail to be imposed.  In such cases, potential sentence which may be imposed by the Court may supercede sealing concerns in plea negotiations.

        In the event the victim has suffered financial loss, at the earliest opportunity a defendant should make arrangements to borrow sufficient money or otherwise have capability to make full restitution.  Ability to make full restitution may result in more favorable plea negotiations.  If the alleged victim is a merchant, refer to civil damages and exclusion below.

        Law enforcement agency dispatch tapes and 911 voice recordings are typically maintained for a period of time which is sufficient to procure via subpoena duces tecum - no exigency exists.  Not so with merchants - immediate action is required to preserve evidence for defense review.  Stores are commonly equipped with audio, video or rapid photo equipment which produces recordings, and such recordings should be procured by and reviewed by defense counsel.. 
 
        Counsel has issued subpoena duces tecum to multiple merchant establishments in different types of criminal cases.  It has been attorney's past experience that digital merchant recordings are deleted or overwritten in 72 hours (3 days) up to 60 days.  Digital files may be stored off location, such as with ADT or other company which may have a contract with the merchant for security recording and digital file storage.  It has also been counsel's experience that law enforcement or prosecution fails to preserve the audio, video or rapid photo recordings.  For thorough defense preparation, subpoena duces tecum should be immediately issued to the merchant for preservation and production of audio, video or rapid photo digital files.  Such recordings may validate the oral and written statements of store security personnel, or may destroy security personnel's credibility - they may not have seen that which is claimed.  Review of security recordings is important.

        To be charged in municipal court, the thing of value must be below $100 and the alleged theft must have occurred within city limits.
 
        Shoplifting is a minor misdemeanor offense, and for a first offense it is not likely the Court will impose a jail sentence.  Attendance at a petty theft class will be ordered; it is advisable to immediately enroll as this may facilitate plea negotiations.  Public service may also be ordered.  Colorado Springs Municipal Court does not use the state courts supervision agency; public service is monitored by the Municipal Court Probation Department.  Public service is accepted if completed with any non-profit organization which can provide a non-profit tax ID number and will confirm a defendant's volunteer work.  Many non-profit organizations may decline given that the allegation is a crime of dishonesty, so be prepared to contact more than one agency.  For a first offense, counsel recommends to clients that 24 hours public service be completed at the earliest opportunity.  Probation department supervision may be avoided if the petty theft class and public service are completed prior to court review of deferred sentencing or straight sentencing.

        Refer to above merchant security recordings regarding immediacy of discovery subpoena duces tecum.

        Refer to above general concepts regarding sealing concerns.

        Refer to below civil damages (actual or punitive).  Civil lawsuit should also be avoided to eliminate court records which may be found in a background search.

2.3.202: DEFINITIONS
 
        Security Services: Those services which include, but are not limited to, the prevention of burglary, robbery, theft, shoplifting, criminal mischief, arson, assault or trespass and the observation, investigation, detection and/or reporting of incidents to prevent or deter any unlawful or unauthorized activity, the control, regulation or direction of the flow or movements of persons on private property, whether by vehicle, by foot or otherwise. (Ord. 98-71; Ord. 01- 42; Ord. 08-64)

9.6.401: SHOPLIFTING PROHIBITED
 
        A. It is unlawful for any person, without authorization, whether by threat or deception, to knowingly obtain or in any manner exercise control over any goods, wares, merchandise or any other thing of value having a value of less than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) which is owned or held by and offered or displayed for sale by any stores or other mercantile establishment, and the person:
                1. Intends to deprive the store or mercantile establishment permanently of the use or benefit of the thing of value; or
               2. Knowingly uses, conceals, abandons or otherwise exercises control over the thing of value in such a manner as to deprive the store or mercantile establishment permanently of its use or benefit; or
                3. Uses, conceals, abandons or otherwise exercises control over the thing of value intending that the use, concealment, abandonment or control will deprive the store or mercantile establishment permanently of its use or benefit.
        B. For purposes of this section, "deception" includes obtaining a full or partial refund for any goods the person knows have not been paid for or attempting to purchase or purchasing any goods for which the person knows the purchase price has been altered.
        C. It shall constitute prima facie evidence that a person intended to commit the offense of shoplifting if the person wilfully conceals unpurchased goods, wares, merchandise, or any other thing of value owned or held by and offered or intended to be offered or displayed for sale by any store or other mercantile establishment, whether the concealment be on the person or otherwise and whether it takes place on or off the premises of the store or mercantile establishment. (Ord. 82-162; Ord. 83-94; Ord. 85-174; Ord. 90-25; Ord. 92-86; Ord. 98-65; Ord. 01-42; Ord. 07-141)

9.6.402: CONCEALMENT OF GOODS
 
        If any person wilfully conceals unpurchased goods, wares, merchandise, or any other thing of value owned or held by and offered or intended to be offered or displayed for sale by any store or other mercantile establishment, whether the concealment be on their own person or otherwise and whether such shall take place on or off the premises of the store or mercantile establishment, the concealment shall constitute prima facie evidence that the person intended to commit the offense of shoplifting. (Ord. 82-162; Ord. 83-94; Ord. 01-42)

9.6.403: QUESTIONING OF PERSON SUSPECTED OF SHOPLIFTING WITHOUT LIABILITY
 
        If any person conceals or otherwise carries away any unpurchased goods, wares, merchandise or other thing of value owned or held by and offered or intended to be offered or displayed for sale by any store or other mercantile establishment, the merchant or merchant's employee or any peace or police officer, acting in good faith and upon probable cause based upon reasonable grounds may detain and question the person in a reasonable manner for the purpose of ascertaining whether the person is guilty of shoplifting. Questioning of a person by a merchant, merchant's employee, or peace or police officer does not render the merchant, merchant's employee, or peace or police officer civilly or criminally liable for slander, false arrest, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, or unlawful detention. (Ord. 82-162; Ord. 83- 94; Ord. 01-42)

1.1.201: GENERAL PENALTY 1
        A.  Any person who performs or fails to perform an act where the performance or failure to perform is declared in any provision of this Code or any promulgated rule or regulation to be unlawful or an offense or misdemeanor, or any person who performs an act which is prohibited or fails to perform an act which is required by any provision of this Code or any promulgated rule or regulation, or any person who fails to meet a standard of conduct or behavior prescribed in any provision of this Code for which no specific penalty is provided shall, upon conviction, be punished as provided in subsection B of this section.
        B.  Any person convicted for the violation of any provision of this Code or any promulgated rule or regulation shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500.00), by imprisonment in jail for a period not exceeding ninety (90) days, by a sentence of probation, or by a combination of fine and/or imprisonment and/or a sentence of probation, unless otherwise provided. The Municipal Court shall designate fines which may be made payable at the Violations Bureau. The minimum fine shall be as follows for the following offenses:
                1. Section 10.17.105 entitled, "Traffic Control Signal Legend", of this Code; the court shall impose a fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00).
                2. Section 10.3.101 entitled, "Approaching Stop Or Yield Intersections", of this Code; the court shall impose a fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00).
                3. Chapter 10, "Motor Vehicles And Traffic", Article 5, "Speed Regulations", of this Code; the court shall have the discretion to reduce the payable fine for speeding offenses by no more than thirty dollars ($30.00).
        C.  A separate and distinct offense shall be deemed to have been committed for each day on which any violation of this Code or of any City rule or regulation shall continue.
        D.  The provisions of this section shall not be applicable to violations of the City's Zoning Code and sections 9.6.606 through 9.6.615 of this Code.
        E.  Possibility of imprisonment upon conviction for violation of the offenses listed in section 11.4.104 of this Code is hereby eliminated. (Ord. 4747; 1968 Code §15-1; 1980 Code; Ord. 82-164; Ord. 86-66; Ord. 88-205; Ord. 91-34; Ord. 94-180; Ord. 95-168; Ord. 96-43; Ord. 96-99; Ord. 01-42; Ord. 03-49; Ord. 04-177) 

 
        A person charged with shoplifting can anticipate a demand from either the alleged victim merchant or legal counsel for the merchant for actual and / or punitive damages.

 
        A civil lawsuit for punitive damages would create a history discoverable in a background search, and therefore should be avoided - such a civil lawsuit would not likely be subject to sealing.  As mentioned above, it should be the goal of a defendant to eliminate any litigation history of dishonesty claim.

        In effort to resolve a damages dispute and limit the merchant's recoverable costs, an offer of settlement may be made pursuant to CRS 13-17-202.  Offers of settlement are not admissible.  CRE 408
 
        CRS §13-21-107.5 and CRS §13-17-202 do not provide for recovery of attorney's fees; hence a merchant's attorney fees are not collectible unless the defendant maintains a frivolous defense.  If a punitive damages civil lawsuit were to be filed, in practicality the merchant would be limited in recovery to costs of process service and court filing fees, and punitive damages recovery judgment could range between the statutory minimum of $100 to the maximum of $250 which has likely been demanded.
 
        Frequently the value of the article in question is nominal, which reduces likelihood of maximum penalty recovery.  Should judgment enter in favor of the merchant absent settlement and voluntary payment, the issue of satisfying the judgment (execution, garnishment or levy) then comes into play.  The client may or may not be employed.  Settlement would save costly litigation time and expense, and increases the merchant's probability of actual recovery.  These are inducements to a merchant to settle the damage claim for less than the maximum likely demanded.
 
        Attorney recommends to clients that upon receipt of a damage demand from a merchant, the client offer to immediately remit the sum of $100 as the minimum provided by statute in full settlement, satisfaction and accord of all claims or causes of action which the merchant may have against the client.  Written confirmation of acceptance as satisfaction and accord is requested required prior to disbursement, and request is made of the merchant for a date of receipt upon which satisfaction and accord would be conditional.  All communications should deny theft or liability and should reference settlement negotiation as noted in the next paragraph.
 
        Notice is provided to a merchant that any offer of settlement is made pursuant to CRE 408 and CRS 13-17-202.  Inadmissibility is claimed as to liability; admissibility is claimed regarding award of costs.
 
        This method of settlement eliminates the possibility of additional court records of dishonestly which may be found in a subsequent background search, yet nets a lower cost to the client than statutory maximum punitive damages.  Refer to sealing and litigation history.  Clients can't afford to have a discoverable history involving dishonesty.  Settle the merchant damage claim.  All merchants have settled with the exception of King Soopers - refer to below.
 
        Note the following regarding King Soopers / City Market collection policies regarding statutory civil punitive damages in relation to alleged shoplifting.

 
        It is also common for the merchant to provide notice the the person alleged to have shoplifted that the person is prohibited from again entering the store in question or any other store owned, leased or run by the merchant.  If the person again enters premises owned, leased or run by the merchant, the person is subject being arrested and charged with criminal trespassing.  This would include subsidiaries of the merchant - businesses with a different name but operated but the same parent company.
 
        Even if the merchant fails to provide notice of exclusion, it would be a very good idea for the person alleged to have shoplifted to never again enter a store or business owned, leased or run by the merchant, or any subsidiary.  In today's world, security cameras are prevalent in most stores.  Larger merchants may have facial recognition software which may trigger an alarm as soon as a former alleged shoplifter enters the premises.
 
        Refer to sealing and litigation history.  Clients can't afford to have a discoverable history involving dishonesty.  Shop elsewhere in the future.

        Theft is classified based upon the thing of value as follows:

        Similar to municipal court charges, shoplifting charged in state court is frequently a minor misdemeanor offense.  For a first offense it is not likely the Court will impose a jail sentence.  Attendance at a petty theft class will be ordered; it is advisable to immediately enroll as this may facilitate plea negotiations.  Public service may also be ordered.  The County Court in and for El Paso County will not give credit for useful public service unless supervised by the court agency - refer to link.  Many non-profit organizations may decline given that the allegation is a crime of dishonesty; you may not find the particular type of public service which is your first choice.  The supervision agency has a listing of organizations which will accept theft cases.  For a first offense, counsel recommends to clients that 24 hours public service be completed at the earliest opportunity.

        Although still in the sandbox of county court, a Class 1 Misdemeanor is a rather serious criminal offense as reflected by the sentencing range.  The higher the dollar value of the item(s) alleged to have been stolen, the more complex the case and the less likely the DA Office will offer a deferred sentence or negotiate in the realm of subsequent sealing criminal records.   As the value increases, potential sentence which may be imposed by the Court may supercede sealing concerns in plea negotiations and increases the likelihood of trial.

Shoplifting, theft and related charges can have very serious, long term consequences well beyond the sentencing order of the judge.

Background check examples: post secondary educational program acceptance, employment, security clearance, professional licensing CRS 24-72-305.4, volunteering at your child's or grandchild's school, daycare or social group activities such as boyscouts, girlscouts, etc. CRS 24-72-305.3, caregiver functions, CRS 24-72-305.3, foreign travel visa, firearm purchase (gun collection, hunting or target practice) Federal Brady Bill, concealed weapon permit - this mentions only a few common possibilities.

Adoptions - step parent adoption, relative adoption or straight adoption - mandatory background checks of DHS TRAILS, CBI and FBI are required.

Every arrest with jailhouse booking results in a report to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation CBI Central Registry.  Background check of this database can be conducted by anyone at any time - CBI records check database is not difficult to find.

Every shoplifting or theft criminal case court filing results in records with the law enforcement agency, prosecution records and court records.  State judicial records can be checked via LexisNexis or CoCourts or BISI and Denver Court.  Municipal courts are not yet on-line, but accessible to the public with a phone call or written request under the Colorado Open Records Act - CRS 24-72-200.1, et. seq. or the Colorado Criminal Justice Records Act - CRS 24-72-301, et. seq.

Throughout this webpage, potential civil punitive damage lawsuit has been addressed.  That's a very real possibility, including service of process at a most inconvenient time or location. 

     C.R.Civ.P.4(e) Personal Service. Personal service shall be as follows:
     Upon a natural person whose age is eighteen years or older by delivering a copy thereof to the person, or by leaving a copy thereof at the person's usual place of abode, with any person whose age is eighteen years or older and who is a member of the person's family, or at the person's usual workplace, with the person's secretary, administrative assistant, bookkeeper, or managing agent; or by delivering a copy to a person authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process. **  C.R.Civ.P.304(d) - county court rules - in accord

     Personal service at one's place of employment is inconvenient, particularly if one's secretary is served.

     Personal service upon an adult living at one's residence (the wife or husband or one's adult child) is inconvenient.

     Publication.  If personal service is unavailable, process service may be established by publication in a newspaper of general circulation as notice required by CRS 13-1-125 and C.R.Civ.P.4(g), C.R.Civ.P.304(f).  Publication and notice to friends, neighbors, employers, business associates and the community at large would be inconvenient.

     Sealing civil court records is most difficult.  No sealing statute exists for civil court records.  As a protection to civil liberties, our judicial system was founded upon open courts and open court records.  Hopefully no civil forfeiture action will be brought, but if so, sealing civil court records is a an uphill battle which should be fought.  Refer to the sealing link for information, and refer above regarding ease of court records search.

Shoplifting, theft and related offenses are considered to be crimes of dishonesty which may have significant secondary repercussions.  Your ultimate goal should be case conclusion with eligibility to file a petition to seal criminal justice records.  Dismissal or not guilty verdict is insufficient.  Criminal justice records must be sealed to avoid potential secondary consequences.  This is simply beyond the ken of most laymen.  If you'll ever need an attorney in your life, now may be the time.  You may retain my services or the services of another attorney, but hire competent defense counsel.