Colorado: charges and penalty not listed on citation

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Colorado

Last weekend there was a college party at a private residence that was busted. There were minors present who were issued MIP's. However, on one of the kids' citations, the Sherriff failed to check off any boxes or write down the charges on the citation. Is it possible to have this dismissed since presumably no charges were filed on the signed summons?

Anything is possible.

But, the agency may amend the citation prior to the court date. So, he should still show up at the location indicated on the date and time listed on the citation. If they have no charges, lucky him.

Thanks for the information.

So, if I'm understanding this right, the agency has the right to ammend the charges after the fact? And, if they do, is it possible to find out about it prior to the hearing date? Also, would it be advisable to speak with the DA about this prior to the hearing to see what he will do?

StaliJoe said:

Thanks for the information.

So, if I'm understanding this right, the agency has the right to ammend the charges after the fact? And, if they do, is it possible to find out about it prior to the hearing date? Also, would it be advisable to speak with the DA about this prior to the hearing to see what he will do?

Click to expand...

I cannot speak to the peculiarities of your state, but, yes, the agency should be able to amend the charges prior to trial - likely prior to the arraignment (which is likely the first court appearance).

If you find out who is handling them (be it county DA or city prosecutor) they MIGHT talk with the defendant ... or, they might not. These are usually pretty minor matters so there may not be much to talk about. Plus, if someone calls and points this out to the prosecutor before the court date, then that is kinda like asking them to amend it.

Thanks for that information too!

We're trying to evaluate the risks here. All of the kids were offered a plea deal (Alcohol Awareness class) if the signed up for in within the next 5 days. Trial is not set until February. If they sign up for the class now, wouldn't that be an automatic admission of guilt? And still remain on the record? But if the charges are overlooked then it wouldn't ever appear to their record. I'd say to just suck it up and do the class if it weren't for the possibility of the whole thing being dropped...

StaliJoe said:

Thanks for that information too!

We're trying to evaluate the risks here. All of the kids were offered a plea deal (Alcohol Awareness class) if the signed up for in within the next 5 days. Trial is not set until February. If they sign up for the class now, wouldn't that be an automatic admission of guilt? And still remain on the record? But if the charges are overlooked then it wouldn't ever appear to their record. I'd say to just suck it up and do the class if it weren't for the possibility of the whole thing being dropped...

Click to expand...

It might be a diversion program and thus not an admission of guilt upon successful completion. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with this so it is something you might have to look into.

As you have no charges on your citation you may not even be eligible to have such a class count for you.

I can see how it puts you in a quandary, though.

I didn't actually see the class information sheet that was provided to the kids. I will take a look at it when I have access to see if that's what it is. Am I correct to assume that, upon completion of a diversion program/class that their cases would be dismissed at trial? Can anybody take the class? If that's the case, this would be a no brainer - take the class, ask the judge about the (lack) of charges, but have a completion certificate of the class just in case. This is first time offenses for all of the kids and I know that they all were handed the class info. sheets.

Also, the Sheriff mentioned to them that they would also be alerting the University that they attend as to their citations. Was this just a scare tactic? Or can they really do this? There are a couple of them that have scholarships on the line!

At any rate, this is and has been an enormous life learning lesson to all of them, perhaps even more difficult than their Calculus, Physics and Chemistry classes all put together!

Again, thanks for helping me (as a parent) evaluate this situation!

Since an arrest is a public record, there is not likely any law violated by notifying a university of the arrest/citation for the crime. Whether it will be of any relevance to the school if it happened off campus and outside the sphere of any school event, I doubt they will concern themselves. Now, if they are athletes or have some kind of off campus behavior clause in their student code, it might be an issue.

Again, thank you SO much for all of your advise and help in determining what to do to remedy the situation!

To follow up, all of the kiddo's are now enrolled in the diversion class. Upon completion, they will take their completion certificates to the court clerk well before their court dates to cure their citations. I believe that this has been a huge eye opening experience for all of them! They now know and realize that they shouldn't even attend any party where there is alcohol being served to any minors because they run the risk of having this happen again. And, the second time won't be a walk in the park! I've learned that, here in Colorado, all it takes for guilt is to be in the wrong place at the right time! Doesn't matter if you've been drinking or not, you could potentially be found guilty by association just by the simple fact that alcohol was available! Hard lesson to learn...

Yep.

What many young'uns fail to understand is that possession is not a crime of ownership or even consumption, it is a crime of dominion and control. Occasionally, just being underage and at a party where there is ample alcohol being bandied about is sufficient to result in a charge. Best not to go to such parties at all, or to avoid like the plague standing anywhere NEAR a spare bottle, cup, or keg.

CdwJava said:

Yep.

What many young'uns fail to understand is that possession is not a crime of ownership or even consumption, it is a crime of dominion and control. Occasionally, just being underage and at a party where there is ample alcohol being bandied about is sufficient to result in a charge. .

Click to expand...

if the cops stopped the kids from drinking, they (the kids or parents) really didnt have dominion and control then, did they?


I simply would say to the judge, I do not understand the nature and cause of the alleged action with regard to the elements of personal jurisdiction, and venue, until the prosecution properly alleges them (under oath into the record). I am therefore unable to enter a plea to any alleged charge until I have had an opportunity to raise a meaningful defense against these elements. I cannot rebut an unstated presumption.

The courts operate on silent judicial notice of presumption all the time.

Generally, when one appears the Police Officer is not there because he has been instructed to stay home that day.

One might simply say, I wish for a dismissal for lack of prosecution, as the Prosecutor cannot testify to facts under oath, for which he has no first hand knowledge of.

Be especially careful of the judge’s conduct, he is required by his Oath of Office to be an impartial trier of fact, not the assistant prosecutor. I would object if he acts as the co-prosecutor.

Dillon said:

if the cops stopped the kids from drinking, they (the kids) really didnt have dominion and control then, did they?

Click to expand...

Uh ... what?

Well, I suppose that once the police arrest people or stop them from committing crimes NO ONE is still committing them.

I simply would say to the judge, I do not understand the nature and cause of the alleged action with regard to the elements of personal jurisdiction, and venue, until the prosecution properly alleges them (under oath into the record). I am therefore unable to enter a plea to any alleged charge until I have had an opportunity to raise a meaningful defense against these elements. I cannot rebut an unstated presumption.

Click to expand...

And then they would re-read the charges against you and ask for a plea.

But, of course, for some reason you do not seem to acknowledge the legal truth that states can enact statutes that are crimes even if an individual person is NOT the victim.

Generally, when one appears the Police Officer is not there because he has been instructed to stay home that day.

Click to expand...

Huh? If you are talking about the arraignment, you are kinda right. In most states an officer is never required to appear at an arraignment. He or she is not been instructed to stay home, he or she has not been told that they must appear. Big difference.

CdwJava said:

Uh ... what?

Well, I suppose that once the police arrest people or stop them from committing crimes NO ONE is still committing them.

And then they would re-read the charges against you and ask for a plea.

But, of course, for some reason you do not seem to acknowledge the legal truth that states can enact statutes that are crimes even if an individual person is NOT the victim..

Click to expand...

if ones car is out of control and the car has an accident, did the owner really have dominion and control of the car in their actual possession?

its not about stopping alleged criminal actions but one not having dominion and control of their actual possessions. the parents had dominion but the kids had control of the alcohol.

By the way, who is alleging/accusing under oath one has committed a crime, if the officer is not at the arrainment?

you mean, re-read the alleged charges under oath into the court Record by some man or woman with first hand knowledge of the alleged criminal action. Right?

Hmmm..... Dillion, you do indeed make some valid points here. However, since this was everyone's first offense and they all were offered diversion classes, with, upon completion the charged being wiped from their records, it seems that this is by far the easier choice rather than to try to fight the law (and lack of charges on the one citation) and risk losing. If lost, they'd then be stuck with no choice other than to pony up for not only the class, but court costs, community service and having their license revoked for a minimum of 3 months, not to mention the charge being on their record. This, in turn could impact their work and school.

Also, there were a couple of Sherriff's that showed up. And, since everyone at the party had to take a breath test, it's all written up (I assume) in the police report. The kids that hadn't been drinking were fortunate to walk away with nothing, not even a written warning, only a scare. They were fortunate that they weren't issues citations as well!

I might add that it was somewhat funny this afternoon when they all lined up and one by one made the phone call to sign up for their class. By the third kid, the lady taking all of the information appeared to be somewhat amused asking, "So, just how many kids were at this same party?" Hahaha, kind of made me smile too!

Lessons learned the hard way are often best!

You have to understand that Dillon has a particularly erroneous take on the law, believing that for anything to be a crime a person must be a victim along with some other misconceptions that have no place in the law as it exists.

I pity the poor person that one day actually follows one of his ideas and tries to take a judge to task in the manner he often suggests!