Vehicular Assault in Colorado
The attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm are experienced criminal defense attorneys in Colorado who defend people charged with vehicular assault.
Vehicular assault is defined in C.R.S. 18-3-205 which defines the offense as follows:
C.R.S. 18-3-205, Colorado’s Vehicular Assault Statute
In Colorado a person commits vehicular assault defined as:
(1) Intentionally left blank —Ed.
(a) If a person operates or drives a motor vehicle in a reckless manner, and this conduct is the proximate cause of serious bodily injury to another, such person commits vehicular assault.
(b) Intentionally left blank —Ed.
(I) If a person operates or drives a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or one or more drugs, or a combination of both alcohol and one or more drugs, and this conduct is the proximate cause of a serious bodily injury to another, such person commits vehicular assault. This is a strict liability crime.
(I.5) If a person operates or drives a motor vehicle while the person’s ability is impaired by alcohol or one or more drugs, or a combination of both alcohol and one or more drugs, and such conduct is the proximate cause of the serious bodily injury of another, the person commits the crime of vehicular assault.
(II) For the purposes of this subsection (1), one or more drugs means any drug, as defined in section 27-80-203 (13), C.R.S., any controlled substance, as defined in section 18-18-102 (5), and any inhaled glue, aerosol, or other toxic vapor or vapors, as defined in section 18-18-412.
(III) The fact that any person charged with a violation of this subsection (1) is or has been entitled to use one or more drugs under the laws of this state shall not constitute a defense against any charge of violating this subsection (1).
(IV) “Driving under the influence” means driving a vehicle when a person has consumed alcohol or one or more drugs, or a combination of alcohol and one or more drugs, which alcohol alone, or one or more drugs alone, or alcohol combined with one or more drugs affect such person to a degree that such person is substantially incapable, either mentally or physically, or both mentally and physically, of exercising clear judgment, sufficient physical control, or due care in the safe operation of a vehicle.
(V) “Driving while ability impaired” means driving a motor vehicle or vehicle when a person has consumed alcohol or one or more drugs, or a combination of both alcohol and one or more drugs, that affects the person to the slightest degree so that the person is less able than the person ordinarily would have been, either mentally or physically, or both mentally and physically, to exercise clear judgment, sufficient physical control, or due care in the safe operation of a motor vehicle or vehicle.
(c) Vehicular assault, in violation of subsection (1)(b)(I.5) of this section, is a class 5 felony. Vehicular assault, in violation of subsection (1)(a) of this section, is a class 5 felony. Vehicular assault, in violation of subsection (1)(b)(I) of this section, is a class 4 felony.
(2) In any prosecution for a violation of subsection (1) of this section, the amount of alcohol in the defendant’s blood or breath at the time of the commission of the alleged offense, or within a reasonable time thereafter, as shown by analysis of the defendant’s blood or breath, gives rise to the following:
(a) If there was at such time 0.05 or less grams of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of blood, or if there was at such time 0.05 or less grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath, it shall be presumed that the defendant was not under the influence of alcohol.
(b) If there was at such time in excess of 0.05 but less than 0.08 grams of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of blood, or if there was at such time in excess of 0.05 but less than 0.08 grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath, such fact may be considered with other competent evidence in determining whether or not the defendant was under the influence of alcohol.
(c) If there was at such time 0.08 or more grams of alcohol per one hundred milliliters of blood, or if there was at such time 0.08 or more grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath, such fact gives rise to the permissible inference that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol.
(d) If at such time the driver’s blood contained five nanograms or more of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol per milliliter in whole blood, as shown by analysis of the defendant’s blood, such fact gives rise to a permissible inference that the defendant was under the influence of one or more drugs.
(3) The limitations of subsection (2) of this section shall not be construed as limiting the introduction, reception, or consideration of any other competent evidence bearing upon the question of whether or not the defendant was under the influence of alcohol.
(4) Intentionally left blank —Ed.
(a) If a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that any person was driving a motor vehicle in violation of paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section, the person, upon the request of the law enforcement officer, shall take, and complete, and cooperate in the completing of any test or tests of the person’s blood, breath, saliva, or urine for the purpose of determining the alcoholic or drug content within his or her system. The type of test or tests shall be determined by the law enforcement officer requiring the test or tests. If the person refuses to take, or to complete, or to cooperate in the completing of any test or tests, the test or tests may be performed at the direction of a law enforcement officer having probable cause, without the person’s authorization or consent. If any person refuses to take, or to complete, or to cooperate in the taking or completing of any test or tests required by this paragraph (a), the person shall be subject to license revocation pursuant to the provisions of section 42-2-126 (3), C.R.S. When the test or tests show that the amount of alcohol in a person’s blood was in violation of the limits provided for in section 42-2-126 (3)(a), (3)(b), (3)(d), or (3)(e), C.R.S., the person shall be subject to license revocation pursuant to the provisions of section 42-2-126, C.R.S.
(b) Any person who is required to submit to testing shall cooperate with the person authorized to obtain specimens of his blood, breath, saliva, or urine, including the signing of any release or consent forms required by any person, hospital, clinic, or association authorized to obtain such specimens. If such person does not cooperate with the person, hospital, clinic, or association authorized to obtain such specimens, including the signing of any release or consent forms, such noncooperation shall be considered a refusal to submit to testing.
(c) The tests shall be administered at the direction of a law enforcement officer having probable cause to believe that the person committed a violation of subparagraph (I) of paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section and in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by the state board of health concerning the health of the person being tested and the accuracy of such testing. Strict compliance with such rules and regulations shall not be a prerequisite to the admissibility of test results at trial unless the court finds that the extent of noncompliance with a board of health rule has so impaired the validity and reliability of the testing method and the test results as to render the evidence inadmissible. In all other circumstances, failure to strictly comply with such rules and regulations shall only be considered in the weight to be given to the test results and not to the admissibility of such test results. It shall not be a prerequisite to the admissibility of test results at trial that the prosecution present testimony concerning the composition of any kit used to obtain blood, urine, saliva, or breath specimens. A sufficient evidentiary foundation concerning the compliance of such kits with the rules and regulations of the department of public health and environment shall be established by the introduction of a copy of the manufacturer’s or supplier’s certificate of compliance with such rules and regulations if such certificate specifies the contents, sterility, chemical makeup, and amounts of chemicals contained in such kit.
(d) No person except a physician, a registered nurse, an emergency medical service provider certified or licensed under part 2 of article 3.5 of title 25 who is authorized within his or her scope of practice to draw blood, or a person whose normal duties include withdrawing blood samples under the supervision of a physician or registered nurse may withdraw blood to determine the alcohol or drug content of the blood for purposes of this section. In a trial for a violation of subsection (1)(b) of this section, testimony of a law enforcement officer that the officer witnessed the taking of a blood specimen by a person who the officer reasonably believed was authorized to withdraw blood specimens is sufficient evidence that the person was authorized, and testimony from the person who obtained the blood specimens concerning the person’s authorization to obtain blood specimens is not a prerequisite to the admissibility of test results concerning the blood specimens obtained. Civil liability does not attach to a person authorized to obtain blood, breath, saliva, or urine specimens or to a hospital, clinic, or association in or for which the specimens are obtained in accordance with this subsection (4) as a result of the act of obtaining the specimens from any person if the specimens were obtained according to the rules prescribed by the state board of health; except that this subsection (4)(d) does not relieve the person from liability for negligence in obtaining the specimen sample.
(e) Any person who is dead or unconscious shall be tested to determine the alcohol or drug content of his blood or any drug content of his system as provided in this subsection (4). If a test cannot be administered to a person who is unconscious, hospitalized, or undergoing medical treatment because the test would endanger the person’s life or health, the law enforcement agency shall be allowed to test any blood, urine, or saliva which was obtained and not utilized by a health-care provider and shall have access to that portion of the analysis and results of any tests administered by such provider which shows the alcohol or drug content of the person’s blood or any drug content within his system. Such test results shall not be considered privileged communications, and the provisions of section 13-90-107, C.R.S., relating to the physician-patient privilege shall not apply. Any person who is dead, in addition to the tests prescribed, shall also have his blood checked for carbon monoxide content and for the presence of drugs, as prescribed by the department of public health and environment. Such information obtained shall be made a part of the accident report.
(f) If a person refuses to take, or to complete, or to cooperate in the completing of any test or tests as provided in this subsection (4) and such person subsequently stands trial for a violation of subsection (1)(b) of this section, the refusal to take, or to complete, or to cooperate with the completing of any test or tests shall be admissible into evidence at the trial, and a person may not claim the privilege against self-incrimination with regard to the admission of his refusal to take, or to complete, or to cooperate with the completing of any test or tests.
(g) Notwithstanding any provision in section 42-4-1301.1, C.R.S., concerning requirements which relate to the manner in which tests are administered, the test or tests taken pursuant to the provisions of this section may be used for the purposes of driver’s license revocation proceedings under section 42-2-126, C.R.S., and for the purposes of prosecutions for violations of section 42-4-1301 (1) or (2), C.R.S.
(5) In all actions, suits, and judicial proceedings in any court of this state concerning alcohol-related or drug-related traffic offenses, the court shall take judicial notice of methods of testing a person’s alcohol or drug level and of the design and operation of devices, as certified by the department of public health and environment, for testing a person’s blood, breath, saliva, or urine to determine his alcohol or drug level. This subsection (5) shall not prevent the necessity of establishing during a trial that the testing devices used were working properly and that such testing devices were properly operated. Nothing in this subsection (5) shall preclude a defendant from offering evidence concerning the accuracy of testing devices.
Possible Penalties for Vehicular Assault in Colorado
Vehicular Assault
C.R.S. 18-3-205(1)(c)
Possible Penalties
Class 5 Felony
- 1-3 years in Colorado State Prison or Community Corrections followed by 2 years of mandatory parole; or
- Probation; and/or
- $1,000 – $100,000 fine;
- Restitution
Class 4 Felony
- 2-6 years in Colorado State Prison or Community Corrections followed by 3 years of mandatory parole; or
- Probation; and/or
- $2,000 – $500,000 fine;
- Restitution
Class 5 Felony
- 1-3 years in Colorado State Prison or Community Corrections followed by 2 years of mandatory parole; or
- Probation; and/or
- $1,000 – $100,000 fine;
- Restitution
Class 4 Felony
- 2-6 years in Colorado State Prison or Community Corrections followed by 3 years of mandatory parole; or
- Probation; and/or
- $2,000 – $500,000 fine;
- Restitution
Defenses to Vehicular Assault in Colorado
General Denial
The accused will be acquitted if the prosecution cannot prove every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. When the accused raises a general denial defense, the accused denies that the criminal elements of the offense exist. General denial is related to the failure of proof defense. The failure of proof defense arises when the accused pokes holes in the prosecution’s case and argues that the prosecution failed to prove each and every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.
Mistaken Identity
Mistaken identity is a general denial defense that attacks the element of who committed the alleged offense. As the prosecution is required not only to prove that the offense happened, but that the person charged committed the offense, the mistaken identity defense can be an effective way to challenge the prosecution on the element of who committed the crime. In the context of a vehicular assault case, mistaken identity defenses usually arise when the accused is arrested and charged with disobedience to public safety orders in riot conditions after the alleged offense happened or when the accused is identified after a chaotic situation where eyewitness accounts are not trustworthy. Mistaken identity cases often involve witness misidentification issues, poor witness perception issues, inaccurate, improper, or biased police identification procedures, grainy surveillance videos, and mistaken eyewitness accounts.
Alternate Suspect
The alternate suspect defense occasionally arises in vehicular assault cases. When the accused raises the alternate suspect defense, he or she does so to cast doubt on the identity element of the offense. In other words, the alternate suspect defense is used to cast doubt on the prosecution’s evidence that the accused committed the crime. By raising the alternate suspect defense, the accused casts doubt on the identity element of offense by raising the possibility that another person committed the offense rather than the accused. In Colorado vehicular assault trials the admissibility of alternate suspect evidence will depend on “the strength of the connection between the alternate suspect and the charged crime. If there is a non-speculative connection or nexus between the alternate suspect and the crime charged, the evidence will be admissible.”
If the defense introduces “alternate suspect” evidence, the judge must “look to whether all the similar acts and circumstances, taken together, support a finding that the same person was probably involved in both the other act and the charged crime.” If the judge finds that the accused has presented evidence sufficient to support a finding that an alternate suspect committed the crime, the accused can have the jury consider this evidence in their deliberations. While the alternate suspect defense is seldom used in vehicular assault cases, certain circumstances will give rise to the availability of this defense.
Duress
Under Colorado’s duress statute C.R.S. 18-1-708, a person may not be convicted of an offense, other than a class 1 felony, based upon conduct in which he engaged at the direction of another person because of the use or threatened use of unlawful force upon him or upon another person, which force or threatened use thereof a reasonable person in his situation would have been unable to resist. This defense is not available when a person intentionally or recklessly places himself in a situation in which it is foreseeable that he will be subjected to such force or threatened use thereof. The choice of evils defense, provided in section 18-1-702, shall not be available to a defendant in addition to the defense of duress provided under this section unless separate facts exist which warrant its application.
Entrapment
Under Colorado’s entrapment statute, C.R.S. 18-1-709, the commission of acts which would otherwise constitute an offense is not criminal if the defendant engaged in the proscribed conduct because he was induced to do so by a law enforcement official or other person acting under his direction, seeking to obtain evidence for the purpose of prosecution, and the methods used to obtain that evidence were such as to create a substantial risk that the acts would be committed by a person who, but for such inducement, would not have conceived of or engaged in conduct of the sort induced. Merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense is not entrapment even though representations or inducements calculated to overcome the offender’s fear of detection are used.
Choice of Evils
Under Colorado’s choice of evils statute, C.R.S. 18-1-702 (1) conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when it is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no conduct of the actor, and which is of sufficient gravity that, according to ordinary standards of intelligence and morality, the desirability and urgency of avoiding the injury clearly outweigh the desirability of avoiding the injury sought to be prevented by the statute defining the offense in issue.
(2) The necessity and justifiability of conduct under subsection (1) of this section shall not rest upon considerations pertaining only to the morality and advisability of the statute, either in its general application or with respect to its application to a particular class of cases arising thereunder. When evidence relating to the defense of justification under this section is offered by the defendant, before it is submitted for the consideration of the jury, the court shall first rule as a matter of law whether the claimed facts and circumstances would, if established, constitute a justification.
Statute of Limitations for Vehicular Assault in Colorado
In Colorado the statute of limitations for commencing criminal charges against a person is governed by C.R.S. Section 16-5-401. The statute of limitations for commencing criminal charges for vehicular assault in Colorado is as follows:
- Felony vehicular assault charges must be filed within 3 years. C.R.S. 16-5-401(1)(a.5)
Legal References
- C.R.S. 18-3-205 https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_18-3-205
Contact the Attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm to Fight for You Today
If you’ve been charged with vehicular assault, contact the attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm to vindicate your rights and protect your liberties. If you’re facing criminal charges or fear you may be charged, time is of the essence. Start Your Free Criminal Defense Case Quote. By retaining Rights & Liberties Law Firm you can rest assured that:
- The attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm will use experienced investigators and experts to look into the case to get ahead of the police and prosecutors, whether there has already been an arrest or an investigation is on-going;
- The attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm will advocate for you during your bond hearing to get you released from custody on the lowest possible amount of bail or on a personal recognizance bond;
- The attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm will litigate all constitutional violations and fight to suppress any evidence illegally seized or obtained by police and investigators in violation of your rights;
- The attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm are trial dogs. If you’re prepared to go all the way, so are we. We’ll take your case to the jury and fight with everything we’ve got to secure your acquittal.
- The attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm are skilled negotiators. If you’ve made a mistake we will leave no stone unturned in presenting mitigation to contextualize your circumstances. We will obtain information and prepare a mitigation presentation or report to the prosecutor to present you in your best light and show the state and the judge that despite your mistakes you’re a dignified human being worthy of leniency and redemption. We will protect you from the overly punitive instincts of the criminal legal system and obtain the best plea bargain possible.
- If you’re up against the wall facing serious charges, jail, or prison time the attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm have your back. From drug distribution and barfights to sex assaults and homicides the attorneys at Rights & Liberties Law Firm know that life gets wild and things fall apart. We’ll fight to keep your life together and advocate to ensure that you receive a non-prison sentence, or one which results in the lowest amount of prison time possible.
- If you’re wondering why we do this work, we’re in it because we care. At Rights & Liberties Law Firm we believe that no individual’s crime holds a candle to the injustices meted out by our unusually cruel overly punitive criminal legal system. At Rights & Liberties Law Firm we fight for people whose talents, dreams, and lives have been put on hold by a criminal accusation. Let us fight for you.