Colorado
Restoration of Rights & Record Relief

                                                                                            Last updated: October 14, 2024

I.  Loss & restoration of civil/firearms rights 

A.  Vote

A person convicted of a felony loses the right to vote only while actually serving a prison term. See Colo. Const. art. 7, § 10 (A person shall not be eligible to vote “while confined in any public prison,” but shall be restored to the rights of citizenship “after serving out his full term of imprisonment.”); Colo. Rev. Stat. § 1-2-103(4)(“No person while serving a sentence of detention or confinement in a correctional facility, jail, or other location for a felony conviction is eligible to register to vote or to vote in any election. . . . An individual serving a sentence of parole is eligible to register to vote and to vote in any election.”) 

Until 2019, a “full term of imprisonment” included a period of parole; effective August 1, 2019, HB 19-1266 amended § 1-2-103(4) to restore the vote to parolees, and requires parole authorities to inform people leaving prison of their right to vote and how to register.1 A person in pre-trial detention may vote by mail. § 1-2-103(4).  

B.  Office, Jury

Office:  Persons convicted of a felony are disqualified from public office only while incarcerated, or while on parole from a prison sentence, Colo. Const. art. 7, § 6 (“No person except a qualified elector shall be elected or appointed to any civil or military office in the state.”); Sterling v. Archambault, 332 P.2d 994, 995 (Colo. 1958)(holding under art. 7, § 10 that candidate who had served prison sentences and paid fines imposed was a “qualified elector” and thus eligible to run for office even though period of probation had not yet terminated).  Certain exceptions are specified in the state constitution.  See Colo. Const. art XII, § 4 (conviction of embezzlement of public money, bribery, and perjury all result in permanent disqualification from public office). 

Jury:  Eligibility for petit jury not lost (the disqualification statute was repealed in 1989) although felony conviction can be basis of challenge. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-71-105. See People v. Lewis, 180 Colo. 423, 427-28 (Colo. 1973).  Felony conviction basis for exclusion from grand juries. § 13-71-105(3). 

C.  Firearms

Possession of firearms by a person convicted of a felony is a crime. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-12-108(1), (2).  Penalty for illegal possession is enhanced if possession occurs within ten years of conviction or release from supervision, for burglary, arson, or any felony involving violence.   § 18-12-108(2)(c).  Firearms rights may be restored by petition to the court 10 years after completion of sentence. § 18-12-108(3). According to an inventory of state collateral consequences prepared by the State Office of Public Defender, “a deferred judgment and sentence, pursuant to section 18-1.3-102, is a prior conviction” resulting in the loss of firearms rights. “Although the law is unsettled, this appears to be true even if the deferred judgment and sentence is successfully completed. See The Consequences of Conviction: Sanctions Beyond the Sentence Under Colorado Law 26 (2019 update). 

D.  Compilation of collateral consequences

The Colorado State Public Defender has compiled an inventory of collateral consequences and statutory relief provisions under Colorado law, which is regularly updated.  See The Consequences of Conviction: Sanctions Beyond the Sentence Under Colorado Law (2019 update).  Provisions governing sealing and expungement are at pp. 5-11.  Mark Evans, Lead Deputy State Public Defender, is the primary author of this very useful compendium. 

II.  Pardon policy & practice 

A.  Authority

The pardon power is vested in the governor, except in cases of treason or impeachment, “subject to such regulation as may be prescribed by law relative to the manner of applying for pardons.”   Colo. Const. art. IV, § 7.  In every instance where the governor exercises the power, he must “send to the General Assembly at its first session thereafter, a transcript of the petition, all proceedings, and the reasons for his action.”  Id.   The clemency power is regulated by Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 16-17-102, and grants not issued in compliance with those provisions are invalid.  See People ex rel. Garrison v. Lamm, 622 P.2d 87 (Colo. App. 1980).  Section 16-17-102 provides that before approving a pardon application the governor must submit it to the district attorney, the sentencing judge, and the prosecuting attorney: 

“Before the governor approves [a pardon] application, it shall be first submitted to the present district attorney of the district in which the applicant was convicted and to the judge who sentenced and the attorney who prosecuted at the trial of the applicant, if available, for such comment as they may deem proper concerning the merits of the application, so as to provide the governor with information upon which to base his or her action. The governor shall make reasonable efforts to locate the judge who sentenced and the attorney who prosecuted at the trial of the applicant and shall afford them a reasonable time, not less than fourteen days, to comment on such applications.”

B.  Administration

The governor is advised by the non-statutory Colorado Executive Clemency Advisory Board, established within the Office of the Governor and consisting of seven members appointed by the governor, including the Executive Director of the Corrections Department, the Executive Director of the Department of Public Safety, and one crime victim representative.   The Board must meet at least once every six months.   The Board is staffed by the Department of Corrections and assisted by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation for background investigations.  The Board was reconstituted by Governor Jared Polis in October 2019. 

C.  Eligibility

Pardon applications are not generally accepted until at least 10 years after completion of a sentence.  Persons convicted under federal law or in another state are not eligible for a gubernatorial pardon.

D.  Effect

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-17-103, enacted in 2013, provides that “A pardon issued by the governor shall waive all collateral consequences associated with each conviction” unless the pardon limits the scope.   In addition, pursuant to a law enacted in 2021, a pardoned conviction may be sealed by the court.  See discussion of § 24-72-710 in Part IIIA below.    

E.  Process

See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-17-102.  After a conviction, all applications for commutation of sentence or pardon for crimes committed shall be accompanied by a certificate of the respective superintendent of the correctional facility, showing the conduct of an applicant during his confinement in the correctional facility, together with such evidence of former good character as the applicant may be able to produce. While governors have from time to time explained their criteria for granting a pardon, there appear to be no published standards at the present time.  Before the governor approves such application, it shall be first submitted to the present district attorney of the district in which the applicant was convicted and to the judge who sentenced and the attorney who prosecuted at the trial of the applicant, if available, for such comment as they may deem proper concerning the merits of the application, so as to provide the governor with information upon which to base his action. The governor shall make reasonable efforts to locate the judge who sentenced and the attorney who prosecuted at the trial of the applicant and shall afford them a reasonable time, not less than ten days, to comment on such applications.   

An application form is posted on the website of the Department of Corrections.    

Marijuana possession: Per a 2020 bill, the governor may pardon a class of defendants convicted of possession of up to two ounces of marijuana. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-17-102(2). While a formal application need not be filed, an individual will still have to request relief since the state has no database that identifies marijuana possession convictions.   In the fall of 2020, Governor Polis pardoned 2700 people for possession of up to one ounces of marijuana offenses. In December 2021, after the statute had been expanded, the governor pardoned 1,351 convictions for possession of two ounces or less of marijuana.

F.  Qualifications

“Good character previous to conviction, good conduct during confinement in the correctional facility, the statements of the sentencing judge and the district attorneys, if any, and any other material concerning the merits of the application shall be given such weight as to the governor may seem just and proper, in view of the circumstances of each particular case, a due regard being had to the reformation of the accused.”   Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-17-102. The application for contains additional requirements, including five letters of recommendation. 

G.  Frequency of grants

Governor Jared Polis reconstituted the Executive Clemency Advisory Board in the fall of 2019, and since that time he has regularly issued more than a dozen pardons and several commutations each December. See, e.g., https://www.cpr.org/2023/12/22/gov-jared-polis-grants-clemency-to-28-people-including-a-former-teen-sentenced-for-murder/.  As of the fall of 2024 he had issued a total of 87 pardons and several dozen pardons.  Governor Polis also used his pardon power to clear the record of hundreds of people convicted of marijuana offenses that had been decriminalized (2700 in 2020, and 1351 in 2021 as the scope of legalization expanded). It would appear that under Governor Polis pardoning has been reestablished in the state on a regular basis.  

Governor Hickenlooper granted a total of 156 pardons and several sentence commutations during his eight years in office (2011-2019), all of them during the 18 months between June 2017 and December 2018.  His first pardon was issued in June 2017 to a native of Cuba seeking to avoid deportation.  See Keith Coffman, Colorado Governor Pardons Man Facing Deportation to Cuba, Reuters. On November 20, 2017, commenting on his philosophy of pardoning, he stated that 

A clemency is an opportunity to really give someone a second chance,” Hickenlooper said. “Someone who’s committed a crime oftentimes when they are much younger. And I think sometimes our criminal justice system of punishment can be almost counterproductive when you see people who have spent 20 or 30 — in some cases 40 — years living exemplary lives, and yet it is still nagging them.    

During his first six years in office, Governor Hickenlooper showed little interest in his pardoning power. He created an Executive Clemency Advisory Board in 2012, but did not appoint its members until January 2015.  A total of 220 applications were pending at that time. 

Until the final 18 months of Governor Hickenlooper’s term, the pardon power had not been functioning in Colorado in a meaningful fashion for a number of years.  Governor Ritter (2007-2011) granted only three pardons until his final two weeks in office, when he granted 39 pardons (one posthumously) and ten commutations.  His predecessor Bill Owens granted 13 pardons over his eight years in office.  Source: Colorado Governor’s Office.  

H.  Contact

  Office of Executive Clemency
   940 Broadway
   Denver, Colorado 80203

   303-763-2431

   doc_clemency@state.co.us.

III.  Expungement, sealing & other record relief 

Colorado has revised its laws on criminal records several times since 2011, steadily expanding the range of records eligible for sealing, reducing waiting periods, and in 2022 making sealing automatic for many records. 

2019 expansion of sealing:  The most dramatic expansion of the laws governing sealing occurred in 2019 when the entire section on criminal justice record-sealing was repealed, reorganized and reenacted by HB 1275, with amendments, as reflected below.  See also pp. 5-9 of the Colorado State Public Defender’s Consequences of Conviction, supra. Self-help resources for sealing criminal records, as well as the documents necessary for doing so, can be found on the Colorado State Judicial Branch website. 

2022 Clean Slate:  In 2022, SB99 expanded automatic sealing (previously applicable only to certain drug offenses) to all offenses currently eligible for petition-based sealing, including records involved in diversion agreements and records associated with status as victim of human trafficking, with the exception of violent crimes.  This law made other improvements to Colorado’s record-sealing scheme, including reducing waiting periods and omitting the requirement to pay outstanding fines and fees (though retaining restitution), and providing for sealing of municipal offenses and multiple offenses. The law allows a district attorney to object to the automatic sealing of a felony offense that is not a drug felony and, if the defendant requests a hearing in that case, the court shall schedule a hearing to determine whether to seal the records. It requires the state court administrator to produce an annual report regarding automatic record sealing. During the 2023 and 2024 legislative sessions, the judicial department “shall report” on the progress of its implementation of the automatic sealing created by the act.  See additional discussion below.

2024 revision to simplify and expand sealing: In 2024, HB1133 became the third major revision of Colorado’s sealing laws in a five-year period, simplifying procedures, and providing for automatic sealing of deferred adjudication records.

A.  General sealing of conviction records

Prior to 2019, the general provisions for sealing of convictions in Colorado law related exclusively to drug crimes, with eligibility waiting periods ranging between three and ten years “after the later of the date of the final disposition of all criminal proceedings against the defendant or the release of the defendant from supervision concerning a criminal conviction.” § 24-72-706(1)(b).  HB 1275 revised most of the provisions governing sealing of convictions, so that petty offenses and certain less serious felonies, including but not limited to drug crimes, became eligible for sealing.  Eligibility waiting periods range from one year in the case of petty offenses, to three years for misdemeanors and lower-level felonies, to five years for all other eligible felonies. Id. Drug felonies are subject to shorter waiting periods than other felonies.   Class 1, 2 and 3 felonies are ineligible for sealing (except for class 3 felony marijuana cultivation before Oct. 1, 2013, see SB 21-1090), as are other specified crimes involving sexual offenses, traffic offenses, and a long list of other crimes involving violence or dangerous conduct.  § 24-72-706(2)(a).  

In cases where an individual was convicted of more than one charge, records of the case may can only be sealed if all charges are eligible. If a case was dismissed or not charged due to a plea agreement, sealing is governed by the charge in which the conviction was entered.  Conviction records cannot be sealed if the person was convicted of a criminal offense after the date of the final disposition of all criminal proceedings or since the date of the defendant’s release from supervision, whichever is later. § 24-72-706(1)(f).  This has been interpreted to limit sealing to a single case (but see new authority to seal multiple cases enacted in 2021). 

 A misdemeanor offense that is otherwise ineligible may be rendered eligible if the DA consents, or if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that “the petitioner’s need for sealing of the record is significant and substantial, the passage of time is such that the petitioner is no longer a threat to public safety, and the public disclosure of the record is no longer necessary to protect or inform the public.” § 24-72-706(2)(b).

Another bill signed the same day as HB 1275, HB 1263 provided for additional treatment options for people with drug offenses in lieu of imprisonment and reduced the maximum penalty for misdemeanor drug offenses (both levels 1 and 2) to 364 days imprisonment, thereby avoiding mandatory deportation as an “aggravated felony” under federal law.  SB8, which had been signed into law about a week before the governor signed HR1275 and whose terms were incorporated by that bill into § 24-72-706(a), charged the Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice with advising on alternatives to prison for drug offenses and directed it to report by June 2020 on establishing a mechanism for automatic sealing of drug convictions.

Payment of court debt and restitution as qualification for sealing:  Convictions for state misdemeanor and felony offenses that are otherwise eligible for sealing “may not be sealed if the defendant still owes restitution unless the court that entered the order for restitution vacated the order.” Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 24-72-706(1)(e), 709(4). Both provisions were amended in 2022 by SB99 to omit obligation to pay “fines, court costs, late fees, or other fees ordered by the court in the case that is the subject of the motion to seal conviction records.” Sealing of municipal offenses is also not subject to this requirement. See id. § 24-72-708. The 2022 revision of the general sealing provision in § 24-72-703 provided that, effective in 2025, “Neither the court nor the state court administrator’s office shall factor in or take into consideration any unpaid fines, court costs, late fees, or other fees ordered by the court in the case that is the subject of the motion to seal when the court is determining whether the record should be sealed.” § 24-72-703(12)(b).  This same law deleted a provision in (12)(b) that prohibited sealing if restitution was owed (“Conviction records must not be sealed if the defendant still owes restitution”). 

In sum, it seems that unpaid fines and fees may never be considered in sealing conviction or non-conviction records. Unpaid restitution will bar sealing of conviction records under § 24-72-706(1)(e), and may be considered by the court in the case of sealing of non-conviction records.   

Multiple and pardoned convictions:   In 2021, additional provisions were enacted to authorize sealing of multiple conviction records, and of pardoned convictions.  See HB1214, enacting §§ 24-72-709, 24-72-710.  In the case of multiple convictions, extended waiting periods and disqualifying priors were enacted depending upon the offense for which sealing is sought.  No conviction may follow the last conviction for which sealing is sought.  § 24-72-709.  Waiting periods were reduced in 2022 by SB99. Procedures were simplified and fees eliminated in 2024 by HR1133.  

In the case of pardoned convictions, the district attorney may object, in which case a hearing is held; the court “shall order the records sealed unless” the court finds that the harm to the public interests outweighs the harm to the privacy of the individual, the danger of unwarranted adverse consequences to the defendant, and the intent of the full and unconditional pardon.  § 24-72-710.

B.  Clean Slate automatic sealing

In 2022, SB99 expanded automatic sealing (previously applicable only to certain drug offenses) to all offenses currently eligible for petition-based sealing, including records involved in diversion agreements and records associated with the defendant’s status as a victim of human trafficking, with the exception of violent crimes subject to the victims rights act. See § 13-3-117.  Waiting periods are 4 years for civil infractions, 7 years for petty misdemeanors, and 10 years for eligible felonies — substantially longer than for petition-based sealing. Allows for the immediate automatic sealing of eligible non-conviction records. Payment of outstanding fees or fines is no longer a condition for automatic sealing. Allows the district attorney 45 days to object to the sealing of a non-drug related eligible felony conviction based on “reasonable belief” that “public interest and public safety” requires continued public access to record, and provides that the defendant will be subsequently informed of their right to a hearing on this objection. Requires consumer reporting agencies to exclude sealed or expunged records from their reports. 

The act requires district attorneys, in the completion of diversion prior to charges being filed, to seal diversion records without a court order. The act provides that a defendant’s and a district attorney’s access to sealed records do not require a court order. The act provides the conditions that must be met for a researcher to access sealed records without a court order. The act allows a record to be sealed if a defendant owes fines, court fees, late fees, or other court-ordered fees.The act requires the Colorado bureau of investigation to produce an annual report regarding record sealing.

Beginning in July 2024, the state court administrator must compile lists of eligible records except eligible felonies, and on a quarterly basis thereafter. Automatic clearance of eligible felonies begins in July 2025. The state court administrator must report annually to the House Judiciary Committee on statistics of sealed/objected records. Provides for the defendant and the criminal justice agency to reply, upon inquiry into the sealed record, that a public criminal record does not exist.  In 2024 HB1133 simplified procedures and made clear that clean slate covers deferred adjudications, and charged the state court administrator with facilitating sealing of non-convictions records.   

C.  Specific convictions eligible for sealing 

Felony drug offense “knocked down” to misdemeanor: Effective July 1, 2013, persons convicted of less serious felony drug offenses (whether by plea or trial) with no more than one prior conviction may have their convictions vacated and reduced to a misdemeanor upon successful completion of probation.  Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-103.5 (“In order to expand opportunities for offenders to avoid a drug felony conviction, to reduce the significant negative consequences of that felony conviction, and to provide positive reinforcement for drug offenders who work to successfully complete any community-based sentence imposed by the court, the legislature hereby creates an additional opportunity for those drug offenders who may not otherwise have been eligible for or successful in other statutorily created programs that allow the drug offender to avoid a felony conviction, such as diversion or deferred judgment.”)  Felonies otherwise ineligible for sealing, see above, may become eligible following reduction.

Marijuana offenses:   Sealing of marijuana arrest and convictions by petition was orignally authorized in 2017, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-710 (2017, added by HB 17-1266), but this authority was repealed in 2019 along with the entire chapter, and new provisions authorizing sealing of marijuana possession records on petition were incorporated into the general drug sealing authority in § 24-72-706. See HB 21-1090.  An amended, § 24-72-706(1)(f)(I) made sealing of marijuana possession records mandatory upon completion of sentence, along with all petty offenses and petty drug offenses, if the defendant has not been convicted of a criminal offense since release from supervision.  Class 4 felony convictions for marijuana possession was also authorized for expungement after a two-year waiting period  HB 21-1090 also for the first time allowed those convicted of class 3 felony marijuana offenses prior to October 1, 2013, to petition to have the conviction record sealed, though they are not eligible for the mandatory relief process.

Minor in possession offenses may be sealed automatically for first offenses, and by petition after a one-year waiting period for second or subsequent offenses. See § 18-13-122(13).  Also, see the Pardon section above for marijuana-related pardoning.

In 2022, petition-based sealing of marijuana felony and misdemeanor convictions was made automatic along with other drug convictions via the Clean Slate bill, with waiting periods of seven years for misdemeanors and 10 years for felonies.  See above.

Municipal violations:  Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-708 provides for sealing of records pertaining to municipal violations after a three-year waiting period during which the person has not been charged with or convicted of a felony or misdemeanor.  Sealing of violations not related to domestic violence is permissible after 3 years even if there was intervening conviction, so long as there was only one conviction; it was not a felony and did not involve domestic violence, child abuse, or sex abuse; and the person has not been convicted of another felony or misdemeanor in the 10 years preceding final disposition (or release, if later) in the intervening case.  § 24-72-708(1)(a)(II).   Exclusions apply for misdemeanor traffic offenses committed by commercial drivers. § 24-72-708(1)(a)(III). 

Provisions for sealing of municipal records were further amended in 2022 by SB99.   

Pardoned convictions:  See discussion of § 24-72-710, above.  

Victims of human trafficking:   Victims of human trafficking may have records of any misdemeanor or municipal violation sealed on petition, § 24-72-707.  As originally enacted, only convictions for prostitution were eligible for sealing.    

Miscellaneous conviction records eligible for sealing:  Other records that may be sealed are:  convictions of posting a private image for harassment or pecuniary gain, § 24-72-709; convictions of theft of public transportation services by fare evasion. § 24-72-707; convictions or charges for underage possession or consumption of alcohol or marijuana. § 18-13-122(13). 

C.  Effect of sealing

The effect of sealing is explained at length in Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-703.   Employers, landlords, and state and local government agencies are generally prohibited from requiring applicants to disclose any information contained in sealed records, § 24-72-703(4)(d).   Upon the entry of an order to seal the conviction records, the defendant and all criminal justice agencies may properly reply, upon an inquiry in the matter, that public conviction records do not exist with respect to the defendant.  § 24-72-703(2)(a).  However, an order sealing conviction records does not deny access to courts and law enforcement agencies, or any “party or agency required by law to conduct a criminal history record check on an individual.”  Id.   Sealing does not vacate the conviction, and it may be used in subsequent prosecutions.  § 24-72-703(4).  Also, some organizations, including the bar committee, the Department of Education, and criminal justice agencies, may still have access to some information in records sealed under these provisions.  Id.  The Colorado State Public Defender notes that “Individuals with sealed convictions may face a difficult decision regarding whether to tell others about a conviction the individual is not required to disclose but could nevertheless be uncovered during a background check.”  

D.  Procedural issues

Individuals must be advised by the court at sentencing about the provisions for sealing, and by the probation officer or parole officer upon the conclusion of supervision.  Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-703(9).   For more serious felonies, the court must hold a hearing; for petty offenses, petty drug offenses, and per HB 1090 (2021) marijuana possession, the court “shall” order the record sealed without a hearing or opportunity for objection, if the person has not been convicted of a criminal offense since the final disposition or release from supervision, whichever is later; for other offenses, the court need not hold a hearing unless the prosecutor or victim objects.  § 24-72-706(1)(f).  In regard to any conviction of a defendant resulting from a single case in which the defendant is convicted of more than one offense, records of the conviction may be sealed pursuant to the provisions of this part only if the records of every conviction of the defendant resulting from that case may be sealed.  § 24-72-703(12)(a). 

As to unpaid court debt, the 2022 reform provided that “Neither the court nor the state court administrator’s office shall factor in or take into consideration any unpaid fines, court costs, late fees, or other fees ordered by the court in the case that is the subject of the motion to seal when the court is determining whether the record should be sealed.”  § 24-72-703(12)(b).  However, while this same law deleted a provision in (12)(b) requiring payment of restitution in all cases, a provision barring sealing of convictions if restitution is unpaid remains applicaable to convictions via § 24-72-706(1)(e), and in any case it seems that unpaid restitution may still be considered in the court’s discretion in non-conviction cases.   

If a defendant is convicted of a new criminal offense after an order sealing conviction records is entered, the court shall order the conviction records to be unsealed.  § 24-72-703(2)(a)(V).  Any member of the public may petition the court to unseal “upon a showing that circumstances have come into existence since the original sealing and, as a result, the public interest in disclosure now outweighs the defendant’s interest in privacy.”  § 24-72-703(5)(c).

The 2021 law created a “sealing defense fund,” and provided authority for the state public defender to apply for grants or accept donations from public or private sources to represent indigent individuals in sealing proceedings.  See HB1214, enacting Colo. Rev. Stat. § 21-1-107. 

E.  Standards

In the case of conviction records, the court may order the record of a conviction sealed after a hearing “if 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.” § 24-72-706(1)(g).   The court “shall, at a minimum, consider the severity of the offense that is the basis of the conviction records sought to be sealed, the criminal history of the defendant, the number of convictions and dates of the convictions for which the defendant is seeking to have the records sealed, and the need for the government agency to retain the records.”  Id.   In the event the court denies the motion, it is required to give its reasons.  § 24-72-706(1)(c). 

  F. Non-convictions, including diversions and uncharged arrests    

As reorganized and revised in 2019 by HB 1275, chapter 7 addresses the sealing of uncharged arrest records under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-704, and the sealing of other non-conviction records under § 24-72-705.  In 2024, § 24-72-704 was amended by HR1133 to provide for automatic sealing by the court when notified by the district attorney.

Uncharged arrests and diversions:  Effective January 1, 2022, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation must automatically seal uncharged arrests on or after that date within one year of arrest, and the Bureau must automatically seal electronic arrests records without conviction on a historical basis.  See HB1214 (2021), amending § 24-72-704 to add five additional subsections to provide timeframes for accomplishing sealing.  In addition, under § 24-72-704(1)(a), an individual arrested but not charged may petition the court for sealing if  either a) the longest limitations period has run, or b) “the person is no longer being investigated by law enforcement for commission of the offense.”  In addition, an individual who completed a diversion agreement with no charges filed may petition the court to have the record sealed.  Any petition must include a listing of each custodian of the records to whom the sealing order is directed.  § 24-72-704(1)(b).  After determining that the petition is sufficient on its face, the court sets a hearing date in 35 days, and notifies the prosecutor and arresting agency.  If no objection is lodged within 7 days of the scheduled hearing the court vacates the hearing and seals the record.   If the court determines that the arrest is ineligible for sealing, “the court’s order must specify the reasons for the denial of the petition.” §§ 24-72-704(1)(c)(I) and (II).   

Non-conviction records:  Under § 24-72-705(1)(a), the court “shall order the defendant’s criminal justice records sealed” when a case is completely dismissed, when a defendant is acquitted on all counts, when a defendant completes a diversion agreement pursuant to 18-1.3-101, or when a defendant completes a deferred judgment and sentence and all charges are dismissed, pursuant to 18-1.3-102.  Authority for these diversionary dispositions is discussed below.  If a defendant moves under “the expedited procedures of this section, the court shall promptly process the defendant’s request to seal the criminal records within the criminal case without the filing of an independent civil action and without any further evidence.”  If the court did not order the sealing at the time of dismissal, the defendant may make a motion at any time without need for filing a civil action.  § 24-72-705(1)(b).  The subsection “applies retroactively to all eligible cases when the case has been completely dismissed or the defendant has been acquitted of all counts in a state or municipal case.” § 24-72-705(1)(c).     There is a processing fee of $65, waivable for indigency. 

A requirement in earlier versions of the law, that upon objection by the prosecutor the court “find[] 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,” was deleted.  Also deleted were provisions that conditioned sealing of non-conviction records on the running of a statute of limitations.   Also deleted were provisions precluding sealing if the defendant still owed restitution, fines, or other court debt, which now apply only to sealing of conviction records.   A provision permitting sealing where a case was dismissed pursuant to a plea agreement in a separate case was also revised: earlier versions of the law required a petitioner to wait 10 years following final disposition of all criminal proceedings against the person, and to have no intervening criminal charges, but the revised provision requires only waiting until the separate case is eligible for sealing with no mention of intervening charges.   See § 24-72-703 (12)(b).   The court is required to advise a defendant of the availability of this relief at the time charges are dismissed or upon acquittal.  Records pertaining to serious traffic offenses, and offenses involving holders of commercial drivers’ licenses, and sex offenses, are not eligible for sealing. § 24-72-703(12)(c).

A complex, burdensome and costly civil procedure for sealing non-conviction records, previously codified in § 24-72-702(1)(b)(I), was repealed in its entirety.  An expedited process for non-conviction sealing enacted in 2016 was also repealed, and replaced by the similarly expedited procedure in § 24-72-705.2  A fee of $65 is assessed to cover processing costs, which may be waived in the event of indigency.   Per the Colorado State Public Defender, courts have apparently not been coding for sealing under this expedited authority, so it is next to impossible to determine how frequently it is being used. 

Authority for deferred dispositions

Deferred sentencing:  Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-102.  When a defendant enters a guilty plea, courts are authorized, with the consent of the defendant, his attorney, and the prosecutor, to “continue” the case, i.e. postpone the sentencing portion of the case.  The court may continue felony cases for up to four years, and misdemeanor cases for up to two years, during which the defendant is on probation.  Upon successful completion of the probationary period, the guilty plea is withdrawn and the charges are dismissed with prejudice.  In this case, the person is no longer regarded as convicted, including for purposes of sex offender registration.  See McCulley v. People, No. 18SC577, Colo. Sup. Ct., May 18, 2020.  If the defendant violates the terms of the probation, the prosecutor may move to revoke probation, and the judge decides, at a hearing, whether to revoke probation.  Deferred sentencing is used mostly for people with first-time drug offenses referred to drug court.  Sealing is available if the charges are dismissed (see above).   

Pretrial diversion:  See Colo. Rev Stat. § 18-1.3-101.   Effective August 7, 2013, each district attorney is authorized to establish a program for pretrial diversion available to all but specified serious sex offenses.   The purpose of the new authority is “to ensure defendant accountability while allowing defendants to avoid the collateral consequences associated with criminal charges and convictions.” § 18-1.3-101(1).  Eligibility:  In determining whether an individual is appropriate for diversion, the district attorney shall consider: (a) The nature of the crime charged and the circumstances surrounding it; (b) Any special characteristics or circumstances of the defendant; (c) Whether diversion is consistent with the defendant’s rehabilitation and reintegration; and (d) Whether the public interest will be best served by diverting the individual from prosecution.” § 18-1.3-101(3).  The term of diversion is generally two years.

“Upon the defendant’s satisfactory completion of and discharge from supervision, the court shall dismiss with prejudice all charges against the defendant. The effect of the dismissal is to restore the defendant to the status he or she occupied before the arrest, citation, or summons. A successfully completed diversion agreement shall not be considered a conviction for any purpose. A person with an order of dismissal entered pursuant to this article may not be subject to charge, prosecution, or liability under Colorado law of perjury or otherwise giving a false statement by reason of his or her failure to recite or acknowledge the arrest, citation, or summons in response to any inquiry made for any purpose.”

§ 18-1.3-101(10(b).

Expungement of arrests based on mistaken identity:  “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a court shall expunge the arrest and criminal records information of a person who was arrested as a result of mistaken identity and who did not have charges filed against him or her.” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-72-702 (enacted in 2016, reenacted in 2019).  The process is initiated by the arresting law enforcement agency, which must file an expungement petition with the district court within 90 days of “find[ing] that a person was arrested as a result of mistaken identity and no charges were filed.”  The court must expunge the records within 90 days of filing.  Employers, state and local agencies, and educational institutions may not require disclosure of records expunged under this authority, and a person may deny the fact of arrest without penalty.  However, law enforcement retains access to these records, as with sealed records. 

G.  Expungement of juvenile adjudication records

A major revision of the juvenile expungement law, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-1-306, took effect in November 2017.  A second major revision was enacted in 2019.  See y HB 1335.   Under the law as revised, courts must expunge records of the following after 42 days: acquittals and dismissals and, upon completion of sentence, adjudications for petty offenses, class 3 & 4 misdemeanors, and level 1 & 2 drug misdemeanors. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-1-306(4)(a).  Under the 2017 law, diversion, deferred adjudication, or informal adjustment were excepted from mandatory expungement, but in 2019 these dispositions and other sentencing alternatives were specifically included.  Prior to 2017, expungement was available for less-serious offenses only by petition, and subject to the court’s discretion and a waiting period that varied based on the seriousness of the offense.  Exceptions apply for sex offenses, domestic violence, and crimes requiring victim notification.   

Juveniles are also eligible for orders of collateral relief. § 19-2.5-910(1) et seq. (“At the time of the entry of adjudication or at any time thereafter, upon the request of the adjudicated juvenile or upon the court’s own motion, a court may enter an order of collateral relief in the juvenile’s case for the purpose of improving the juvenile’s likelihood of success in the community.”) 

Under the 2019 law, when a court orders diversion or deferred adjudication or an alternative disposition, it must make a finding that the juvenile is eligible for expungement.3  The prosecutor (who receives notice of eligibility from the court), and the victim (who receives notice from the prosecutor), each have 35 days to object to the expungement.  § 19-1-306(5)(a) – (e).4  If neither objects, the court must order expungement. § 19-1-306(5)(d). If either objects, a hearing is held, to determine whether “the rehabilitation of the juvenile has been attained to the satisfaction of the court,” and that “the expungement is in the best interest of the juvenile and the community.”  § 19-1-306(5)(e) – (g). 

Individuals adjudicated as “repeat offenders” and “mandatory sentence offenders” are not otherwise eligible for expungement under subsection (5), but may petition for expungement  36 months after completion of sentence if no charges or delinquency proceedings are pending.  § 19-1-306(6)(e).  The eligibility requirements, procedures, and standards set forth in subsection (5) apply. 

Pursuant to § 19-1-306(8),

A court shall not expunge the record of a person who is:

(A) adjudicated as an aggravated juvenile offender pursuant to section 19-2-516 (4) or as a violent juvenile offender pursuant to section 19-2-516 (3);

(B) adjudicated of homicide and related offenses pursuant to part 1 of article 3 of title 18;

(C) adjudicated for a felony offense involving unlawful sexual behavior as described in section 16-22-102 (9); or

(D) charged, adjudicated, or convicted of any offense or infraction pursuant to title 42 [“Vehicles and Traffic”].

Records of municipal juvenile adjudications are automatically expunged 42 days after completion of sentence.  § 19-1-306(9).  The prosecutor may object, triggering a hearing in which the only issue is whether the sentence has been completed or the case is closed.  § 19-1-306(9)(c) – (e).

Expungement of records in other cases, including closed cases, is covered by subsection (6).

Expungement under § 19-1-306 seals the relevant records of the courts, law enforcement, the Division of Youth Corrections, and the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, and the records “are deemed never to have existed.” § 19-1-306(2)(g), (3); § 19-1-103(48).  An individual may deny the fact of arrest or adjudication. § 19-1-306(1)(a).

The 2019 law enacted an entirely new section that details the effect of expungement in juvenile cases and applicable standards.  See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 13-10-115.5

Separate sealing authority exists for juvenile records in cases of underage alcohol consumption/possession.  Sealing is available after 1 year if the person has not been arrested, charged, or convicted of a crime in the year following conviction.   See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-13-122(10).

Sex offender registration for juveniles  

A new section added by the 2019 law authorizes the court, in a case where the juvenile’s offense requires registration but is eligible for expungement, to direct that registration be discontinued at the same time the court directs expungement.  § 19-1-306(5)(e.5).  The prosecutor and victim are given notice, and they have 63 days to respond.   In 2021 HB 1064 enacted a number of additional provisions providing for termination of registration for juveniles, and generally relaxing registration requirements based on juvenile offenses.  

Expungement of underage DUI offenses

Records of conviction for less serious underage DUI offenses (“UDD” offenses) may be “expunged” after a person’s twenty-first birthday subject to certain conditions and exceptions.  See Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 42-4-1715(1)(b), 42-2-121(5).

H.  “Order of collateral relief” at sentencing

At the time of conviction or at any time thereafter, upon the request of the defendant or upon the court’s own motion, a court may enter an “order of collateral relief” in the criminal case to override certain collateral consequences, “for the purpose of preserving or enhancing the defendant’s employment prospects and to improve the defendant’s likelihood of success in the community.”   Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-107(1), added in 2018 by HB18-1344. Defendants must be notified prior to sentencing of the availability of this relief.  See Col. Rev. Stat. § 16-11-102(1)(a)(II.5).5  

Under § 18-1.3-107(2)(a), an application for an order of collateral relief must cite the grounds for granting the relief, the type of relief sought, and the specific collateral consequence from which the applicant is seeking relief. The 2018 amendments included a provision for a filing fee of $30 when relief is sought after sentence has been imposed, in addition to the usual civil filing fee, subject to waiver for indigency.  § 18-1.3-107(2)(a). The applicant must provide a copy of the application to the district attorney and to the regulatory or licensing body that has jurisdiction over the collateral consequence from which the applicant is seeking relief, if any.

An order of collateral relief may relieve a defendant of any collateral consequences of the conviction, whether in housing or employment barriers or any other sanction or disqualification that the court shall specify, including but not limited to statutory, regulatory, or other collateral consequences that the court may see fit to relieve that will assist the defendant in successfully reintegrating into the community.

18-1.3-107(3). The term “collateral consequences” is defined in subsection 8 to include “collateral sanctions” and “disqualifications,” and those terms are defined in substantially the same terms as in the Uniform Collateral Consequences of Conviction Act.  The State Public Defender reports that some courts have been reluctant to issue orders of collateral relief since the licensing agency would be precluded from considering the conduct underlying the conviction in deciding whether to grant a license.  

A conviction as to which there has been an order of collateral relief may not be the basis for denial of an occupational license. See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-5-101(2)(b)(IV).  On the other hand, an order of collateral relief cannot override any collateral consequences imposed by law for licensure by the department of education or employment with the judicial branch, the department of corrections, division of youth corrections in the department of human services, or any other law enforcement agency in the state of Colorado. § 18-1.3-107(4).    

Certain offenses are not eligible, including crimes of violence and sexual offenses. Standards for relief are set forth in § 18-1.3-107(6)(a):

A court may issue an order of collateral relief if the court finds that: (I) The order of collateral relief is consistent with the applicant’s rehabilitation; and (II) Granting the application would improve the applicant’s likelihood of success in reintegrating into society and is in the public’s interest.

The court “may at any time issue a subsequent judgment to enlarge, limit, or circumscribe the relief previously granted,” or may revoke the relief upon evidence of a subsequent criminal conviction or proof that the defendant is no longer entitled to relief.  § 18-1.3-107(6)(b)-(c).

Juveniles are also eligible for orders of collateral relief. § 19-2.5-910(1) et seq. (“At the time of the entry of adjudication or at any time thereafter, upon the request of the adjudicated juvenile or upon the court’s own motion, a court may enter an order of collateral relief in the juvenile’s case for the purpose of improving the juvenile’s likelihood of success in the community.”) Additional disqualifying offenses apply (crimes of violence and crimes requiring registration as a sex offender).  See § 19-2.5-910(4)(b).

The Colorado State Judicial Branch has issued instructions for filing for orders of collateral relief.  A 2017 report by the Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice found that “the judiciary does not consistently track when orders of collateral relief are requested or granted. This lack of data renders it virtually impossible to determine whether the orders are serving their intended purpose.” See Final Recommendation Presented to the Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, June 9, 2017. The report recommended that the courts should be “encouraged” to collect this data.

IV.   Criminal record in employment, licensing & housing

A.  In general 

Colorado’s 1973 “Ex-Offenders Rights Act” set forth general standards for considering criminal record in licensing and public employment. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-5-101(1)(a):

[T]he fact that a person has been convicted of a felony or other offense involving moral turpitude shall not, in and of itself, prevent the person from applying for and obtaining public employment or from applying for and receiving a license, certification, permit, or registration required by the laws of this state to follow any business, occupation, or profession.6 The law does not provide for administrative enforcement. 

Colorado has strengthened its law on consideration of criminal history in employment and licensing several times, but most recently and significantly in 2024 by HB24-1004 in 2024.  This law clarified ambiguity remaining in the law after HB 18-1418 was enacted in 2018, clearly and forcefully prohibiting denial of licensure except on a public safety basis. In 2019, HB 19-1025 enacted standards regulating consideration of criminal history in private employment and housing.  All three of these important laws are described below.  

B.  Occupational licensing and public employment  

2024 Act:  In 2024, the “Ex-Offenders Practice in Regulated Occupations” Act (HB24-1004) allowed a licensing agency to consider an applicant’s conviction for a 3-year period beginning on the date of conviction or the end of incarceration, whichever date is later. See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 12-20-206 (as added by HB24-1004 in 2024).  If an individual’s conviction is “directly related” to the profession or occupation for which the individual has applied for licensure (defined as raising a public safety risk), the agency may consider the conviction after the 3-year period has passed, but the agency may only deny or refuse to renew a license if the regulator determines that the applicant has not been rehabilitated and is unable to perform the duties and responsibilities of the profession or occupation without creating an unreasonable risk to public safety. An applicant’s conviction for a crime does not, in and of itself, disqualify the applicant from being issued a registration, certification, or license. § 12-20-206(1) through (3).  In order to deny licensure based on criminal conviction, regulators must show with “clear and convincing evidence” that an applicant’s criminal record “directly connects” to the “potential creation of an unreasonable risk to public safety.”  § 12-20-206(5).  The law does not override any specific prohibition on licensing convicted individuals. See § 12-20-202.  

Preliminary consideration:  The act allows an individual to petition a regulator to determine whether a criminal conviction will preclude the individual from becoming registered, certified, or licensed prior to that individual completing any other requirements for such credentialing. § 12-20-206(4).  An individual may apply even while incarcerated, and before undertaking any training.  If a regulator determines that an individual’s conviction will likely be considered, the regulator shall advise the individual of any actions the individual may take to remedy the disqualification.  The act places the burden of proof for denial of an applicant on the regulator to demonstrate that denial based on the applicant’s criminal conviction directly connects to potential performance in the profession or occupation for which the applicant seeks credentialing.

The 2024 Act also amends language in the 1973 law, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-5-101, to prohibit boards from using “vague terms in its considerations” like “good moral character,” “moral turpitude,” and “character and fitness” and repeals provisions authorizing denials based on those terms. 

2018 amendments:  Prior to May 2018 licensing agencies charged under § 24-5-101(2)(a) with determining whether an applicant possesses the requisite “good moral character” for occupational and professional licensure were specifically permitted to consider an individual’s criminal record in this connection.  Language was added to this provision by HB 18-1418 to link consideration of a criminal record more specifically to a determination whether an individual is “qualified.” Any remaining ambiguity in this law was eliminated by the 2024 law, which deleting references to “good moral character” and related language in the statute.  The provision retains the following pre-existing language:  “The intent of this section is to expand employment opportunities for persons who, notwithstanding that fact of conviction of an offense, have been rehabilitated and are ready to accept the responsibilities of a law-abiding and productive member of society.”7 

2018 law prohibitions and protections: In 2018, new language was added to the provision to prohibit a licensing agency or public employer from using as a basis for denial or adverse action arrests and charges not resulting in conviction (though the conduct underlying the arrest may be considered), convictions that have been pardoned, sealed or expunged, or convictions as to which a court has issued an order of collateral relief under § 18-1.3-107(6) (see Part III(H) above).  See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-5-101(2)(b).   

If none of these exclusions apply, the licensing agency or employer “shall consider” the following factors in deciding whether to disqualify based on criminal record:  In determining whether a conviction disqualifies an applicant, the state or licensing agency must consider (1) the nature of the conviction; (2) whether the conviction is “directly related” to the license sought; (3) the applicant’s rehabilitation and good conduct; and (4) time elapsed since conviction.  § 24-5-101(4). The “direct relationship” standard singles out for specific mention convictions of a sexual nature, and circumstances involving particular public safety risks, including care of vulnerable populations.   

Procedural protections added in 2022:  In 2022, HB22-1098 added two subsections to § 24-5-101, requiring a licensing agency to send information to an applicant before making final determination, detailing grounds for denial based on their record and informing them of their right to provide additional evidence relevant to disqualifying factors. The law also requires agencies, upon final determination of an applicant’s disqualification, to inform the individual of their right to appeal an adverse decision, and of the earliest date of reapplication. See §§ 24-5-101(7) and (8).  These amendments remedied a deficiency in Colorado’s law identified in the March 2022 Reintegration Report Card. 

Conditional licenses authorized in 2018:  The 2018 revisions to the law in HB 18-1418 added a section authorizing agencies to issue “conditional licenses” to people with a potentially disqualifying criminal record.  See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-107(5).  The individual may petition for removal of the condition: (1) after one year; or (2) when applying to renew the license, whichever is later.  If the individual has had no further adverse contact with the justice system, and is no longer on probation or parole, the board “shall grant” the request unless it determines that the conditional designation is “necessary.”  After removal, any reference to the original conditional designation shall be confidential. 

Juvenile fair employment and licensing: In 2022 Colorado extended employment opportunities for juveniles via HB1383, by amending §19-2.5-108(2)(b) to prohibit public or private employers from asking about juvenile records, and by amending §24-5-101(2)(b) to add juvenile records to the list of records that may not considered by public licensing agencies in considering an applicant for licensure.

Reciprocity standards: In 2020, Colorado enacted the “Occupational
Credential Portability Program,” authorizing approval of an application for licensure by anyone licensed in another jurisdiction, apparently without regard to whether they meet Colorado’s standards for licensure, unless they have committed an act that would be grounds for disciplinary action in Colorado.  See Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 12-20-202(3)(a), (b), (f)(III).

General Assembly review of regulatory agencies

Under a law enacted in 2013, and expanded in 2018, the General Assembly must determine “Whether the agency through its licensing or certification process imposes any sanctions or disqualifications on applicants based on past criminal history and, if so, whether the sanctions or disqualifications serve public safety or commercial or consumer protection interests.” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-104(6)(b)(IX).  To assist in considering this factor, the department of regulatory agencies shall prepare an analysis including data on the number of licenses or certifications that were denied, revoked, or suspended based on a disqualification and the basis for the disqualification. Id.  The 2018 amendments to this provision made more explicit the information each agency must provide, including the number of conditional licenses issued by each agency pursuant to the new authority in § 24-34-107, described above.

In 2022 the law was again amended to require the Director of the Division of Professions and Occupations to conduct an audit of all licensing agencies to identify barriers to licensure and produce a report for House and Senate committees on the currently existing barriers to licensure based on records, legislative recommendations, statistics on denial of licenses based on records and grounds for denial.  See HB22-1098.

Sunrise provision for new licensing requirements

Any proposal to regulate a new profession or occupation must include “A description of any anticipated disqualifications on an applicant for licensure, certification, relicensure, or recertification based on criminal history and how the disqualifications serve public safety or commercial or consumer protection interests.” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-104.1(2)(f).  See also id. at (4)(b)(IV) (factors to be considered in deciding whether regulation is necessary include “Whether the imposition of any disqualifications . . . based on criminal history serves public safety or commercial or consumer protection interests”).

C.  Employment

1. Public employment

    Ban the-box; standards for considering criminal record in public employment 

In May 2012, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-5-101 was amended to prohibit state agencies (other than the department of corrections and of public safety) from performing a background check “until the agency determines that an applicant is a finalist or makes a conditional offer of employment to the applicant.” § 24-5-101(3)(b).   In 2018 the language excluding from consideration certain criminal records was reworked to conform more closely to the newly enacted exclusions in the law governing licensing decisions, retaining exclusions for non-conviction records, and convictions that have been sealed, expunged or pardoned, and including for the first time convictions where “a court has issued an order of collateral relief specific to the employment sought by the applicant.”  § 24-5-101(3)(c).  One other way in which the exclusion of non-conviction records differs slightly from the analogous provision applicable to licensing is that employing agencies are not permitted to take into account the conduct underlying an arrest not resulting in conviction.   

If none of the exclusions in (3)(c) apply, the agency “shall consider” the following factors in deciding whether to disqualify an applicant based on criminal record:  (1) the nature of the conviction; (2) whether the conviction is “directly related” to the job; (3) the applicant’s rehabilitation and good conduct; and (4) time elapsed since conviction.  § 24-5-101(4).8 The “direct relationship” standard applicable to licensure (see above) also applies to public employment, and was expanded in 2018 to cover employment involving care of vulnerable populations (e.g., age, disability, mental health). 

The law does not apply where a statute bars employment of a person “with a specific criminal conviction for a particular position.”  § 24-5-101(3)(a).  Consideration of criminal history information that the applicant voluntarily provides is permitted.  § 24-5-101(3)(e).  The law addresses blanket bans in job ads by prohibiting the advertisement of a position with a statement that a person with a criminal record may not apply (unless the law itself prohibits hiring someone with a conviction).  § 24-5-101(3)(a).

Exceptions

Section 24-5-101(1) does not apply to certain persons seeking public office and persons seeking licensure and employment in positions involving direct contact with vulnerable persons, public safety, corrections, education, or with the public employees’ retirement association.9  

Section 24-5-101 may also be overridden by statutory requirements related to specific licenses or employment.  See § 24-34-102(8.7) (§ 24-5-101 applies to licensing under titles 10 (“Insurance”) and 12 (“Professions and Occupations”) of the Colorado Statutes “[u]nless there is a specific statutory disqualification that prohibits an applicant from obtaining licensure”); see also § 27-90-111 (screening and disqualification requirements applicable to department of human services employees who have direct contact with vulnerable persons).

2. Private employment

Ban-the-box; standards for considering criminal record in private employment – In 2019, Colorado enacted HB 19-1025 and became the 13th state to prohibit private employers from inquiring about applicants’ criminal histories until later in the hiring process.10  This law—through the addition of a new code section, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-2-130—prohibits private employers from “inquir[ing] into or requir[ing] disclosure of” an individual’s criminal history on an “initial” application form.  § 8-2-130(3).  In addition, employers may not state on an application or an advertisement for a position that someone with criminal history may not apply.   Id.   The law defines “Criminal History” to include any “record[s] of arrests, charges, pleas, or convictions for any misdemeanor or felony at the federal, state, or local level.”  § 8-2-130(2)(a).

However, a broad exception curtails HB 19-1025’s effect, by allowing employers to review an applicant’s publicly available criminal history report at any time. § 8-2-130 (3)(b).  Additionally, the prohibitions in the law apply only to the “initial” application form.  Unlike Colorado’s law regulating consideration of criminal records in public employment, which requires that an applicant be a “finalist” or that an applicant receive a “conditional offer of employment” before public employers may perform a background check, § 24-5-101(3)(b), HB 19-1025 lacks that language, suggesting that private employers may inquire about criminal history at any time after the initial application form.

HB 19-1025 also lacks language analogous to Colorado’s public employment law to require employers to exclude non-convictions, arrests, pardons, expunged and sealed records, and orders for collateral relief from consideration when making hiring decisions.  See § 24-5-101(3)(c).  As a result, HB 19-1025 leaves room for private employers to deny employment merely for an arrest or a charge that does not result in a conviction,11 or for records where a person has obtained judicial or executive relief.

Nonetheless, HB 19-1025 includes enforcement provisions that authorize the Department of Labor and Employment to investigate complaints and impose civil penalties for violations.  § 8-2-130(5). 

Exceptions

HB 19-1025 does not apply to certain positions that federal, state, or local law or regulations forbid employing individuals with a specific criminal history.  § 8-2-130(4)(a). The law also does not apply if an employer is required by law to conduct a criminal history background check for the position, or if the position is designated to participate in a government program to encourage employment of people with criminal histories. §§ 8-2-130(b)-(c). 

        3. Juvenile adjudications

In 2022, Colorado enacted a ban-the-box provision barring most public and private employers from making pre-employment inquiries in juvenile adjudications or other proceedings.  Law enforcement and vulnerable populations excluded. See § 19-2.5-108. enacted by HB1383.  This law also amended § 24-5-101 to bar use of juvenile matters in most employment decisions, giving them the same status as an expunged adult conviction or order of collateral relief.  See above.  

D.  Negligent Hiring

Colorado limits employer liability exposure by preventing the introduction of an employee’s criminal record in a civil action for negligent hiring if “[t]he nature of the criminal history does not bear a direct relationship to the facts underlying the cause of action.”  Colo. Rev. Stat. § 8-2-201(b).  Information regarding an employee’s criminal history also will be excluded if the employee’s record is sealed, if the employee received a pardon, if the record involves an arrest or charge that did not result in a conviction, or if the individual received a deferred judgment at sentencing.  Id.  The legislative declaration accompanying this provision states that employers may be reluctant to hire employees with a criminal record “due to a lack of clarity regarding the employer’s risk of liability for such hire,” that there is “a direct correlation between employment and reduced recidivism” so that “it is in the public interest to clarify employer liability,” and that “it is necessary and appropriate for the General Assembly to reduce unnecessary barriers to employment for persons with a criminal conviction and thereby promote economic opportunity, poverty reduction, and public safety in the state of Colorado.”  See H.B. 10-1023, ch 42, p. 167, § 2 (2010) (An act concerning clarifying civil liability regarding negligent hiring practices for an employer that hires a person with a criminal record”).

E.  Housing

In 2019, Colorado enacted the Rental Application Fairness Act, which provides that a landlord considering a rental application may not consider: 1) any arrest records or 2) records of convictions that occurred more than five years before the application. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-12-904(b). However, a landlord may consider any conviction or deferred judgment for specified methamphetamine and amphetamine offenses, offenses requiring sex offender registration, homicides and related offenses, and stalking offenses. Id. A landlord who violates this statute is liable to a person who is charged a rental application fee for tremble the amount of the fee, plus court costs and reasonable attorney fees, unless the violation is corrected within seven days of receiving notice. § 38-12-905.

  1. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 1-2-103(4) was amended in May 2005 to add “for a felony conviction” to its text.  Prior to that time, the prohibition on voting applicable to incarcerated persons had been interpreted to extend to people with misdemeanors as well as felonies.   It is not clear whether, under the determinate sentencing law adopted by Colorado in 1993, a period of “mandatory parole” following a sentence to confinement “is no longer related to the unserved remainder of the sentence to confinement.”  People v. Norton, 63 P.3d 339, 343 (Colo. 2003).  In light of the constitutional direction that a person “shall be restored to the rights of citizenship after serving out his full term of imprisonment,” it is arguable that the statutory extension of disenfranchisement to the period of parole in § 1-2-103(4) did not survive this change in Colorado’s sentencing law.
  2.   This earlier process prefigured the process enacted in 2019 in § 24-72-705:  The motion “may be informal and may be made in open court at the time of the dismissal of the case or the acquittal of the defendant,” or it “may also be made by the defendant at a time subsequent to the dismissal or acquittal through the filing of a written motion.”  If this expedited procedure is invoked, “the court shall promptly process the defendant’s request to seal the criminal justice records within the criminal case without the filing of an independent civil action.”  When the court seals criminal justice records under this section it is up to the court to provide a copy of its order “to each custodian who may have custody of any of the records subject to the order.”
  3.  A provision in the 2017 law that set forth eligible dispositions and offenses in detail was repealed by the 2019 law. 
  4. When accepting a plea, the prosecutor may agree, with the victim’s consent, not to object to expungement following completion of sentence.  In such cases, the court will automatically expunge the record.
  5.  As originally enacted in 2013, this dispensing authority applied only to non-prison sentences, and was contained in three substantially identical provisions, each dealing with a different type of non-prison sentence:  Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 18-1.3-107 (sentencing alternatives), 18-1.3-213 (probation), and 18-1.3-303 (community corrections), and it was available only at sentencing. This authority was substantially broadened in 2018, with the court’s dispensing authority extended to cover all types of sentence, “at the time of conviction or at any time thereafter,” and the purpose amended to cover “likelihood of success in the community.” Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-1.3-107(1), added by HB18-1344.
  6. See Smith v. Colo. Motor Vehicle Dealer Bd., 200 P.3d 1115, 1117 (Colo. App. 2008):

    Section 24-5-101, in its original form, was part of the 1973 ‘Ex-Offenders’ Rights Act.’ See ch. 151, sec. 1, § 39-25-101, 1973 Colo. Sess. Laws 513; Ficarra v. Dep’t of Regulatory Agencies, 849 P.2d 6, 8 (Colo. 1993). This statute applies generally to state and local licensing agencies, see R & F Enters., Inc. v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 606 P.2d 64, 66 (1980), and, according to the supreme court, ‘is an expression by the general assembly of a public concern that persons who have been convicted of felonies or crimes of moral turpitude should not be deprived of the right to gainful employment solely due to their past activities.’ Beathune v. Colo. Dealer Licensing Bd., 601 P.2d 1386, 1387 (1979). 

  7. It remains to be seen what effect courts will give the statute’s new language. Cf. Smith v. Colo. Motor Vehicle Dealer Bd., 200 P.3d 1115 (Colo. App. 2008) (conviction may serve as a basis for delaying, but not permanently denying, a motor vehicle salesperson license; fact that licensing statute specifies certain convictions within the past 10 years as potentially disqualifying does not create irreconcilable conflict with [§ 24-5-101(1)]”).
  8.   The 2018 revisions made clear that these four factors are inapplicable in cases involving any of the exclusions listed in (3)(c).
  9.   § 24-5-101(1)(b):

    (b) This subsection (1) shall not apply to:

    (I) The offices and convictions described in section 4 of article XII of the state constitution;

    (II) The certification and revocation of certification of peace officers as provided in section 24-31-305;

    (III) The employment of personnel in positions involving direct contact with vulnerable persons as specified in section 27-90-111, C.R.S.;

    (IV) The licensure or authorization of educators prohibited pursuant to section 22-60.5-107(2), (2.5), or (2.6), C.R.S.;

    (V) The employment of persons in public or private correctional facilities pursuant to the provisions of sections 17-1-109.5 and 17-1-202(1)(a)(I) and (1.5), C.R.S., and the employment of persons in public or private juvenile facilities pursuant to the provisions of sections 19-2-403.3 and 19-2-410(4), C.R.S.;

    (VI) The employment of persons by the public employees’ retirement association created pursuant to section 24-51-201 who, upon the commencement of that employment, will have access to association investment information, association assets, or financial, demographic, or other information relating to association members or beneficiaries; and

    (VII) The employment of persons by the department of public safety, the department of corrections, and the department of revenue.” 

  10. Colorado legislators introduced ban-the-box bills in 2016 and 2017 that would have applied to private employers; both bills died in committee.  The 2019 ban-the-box in private employment bill, HB 19-1025, was passed by the legislature and signed into law by Governor Jared Polis on May 28.  HB 19-1025 had an effective date of August 2, 2019, and the law included a two-year phase-in period for its provisions: (1) beginning on September 1, 2019, the prohibitions on consideration of criminal records will apply to private employers with 11 or more employees; and (2) beginning on September 1, 2021, the provisions will apply to all private employers.
  11. However, federal civil rights law may prohibit denial of employment based on arrest.  Specifically, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidance on employment discrimination (as prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.,) provides that exclusion from employment by a covered employer based on an arrest, “in itself, is not job related and consistent with business necessity.”  See EEOC, Enforcement Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest and Conviction Records in Employment Decisions Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., 915.002 at 1 (April 25, 2012), ; Id. at n.2 (defining covered employers) (citing 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2, 2000e(b)–(e), 2000e-16(a)).  Therefore, a policy or practice of exclusion based on arrest is employment discrimination if it has a disparate impact on individuals of a particular race, national origin, or other protected class.  (The EEOC explains that national data, showing disproportionate arrest and incarceration rates for African American and Hispanic people “supports a finding that criminal record exclusions have a disparate impact based on race and national origin,” but this finding can be rebutted with regional or local data.  Id. at 10.)  Nonetheless, a covered “employer may make an employment decision based on the conduct underlying the arrest if the conduct makes the individual unfit for the position.”