Colorado § 16-13-509 Evidentiary presumption

Colorado Statutes

§ 16-13-509 — Evidentiary presumption

Colorado § 16-13-509

Title 16Criminal

Art.Special Proceedings

This text of Colorado § 16-13-509 (Evidentiary presumption) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 16-13-509 (2026).

Text

(1)Whenever clear and convincing evidence adduced in an action pursuant to this part 5 shows a substantial connection between currency and the acts specified in section 16-13-503, a rebuttable presumption shall arise that said currency is contraband property. A substantial connection exists if:

(a)Currency in the aggregate amount of one thousand dollars or more was seized at or close to the time of the occurrence of the subject act or of the recovery of evidence of the subject act; and

(b)(I) Said amount of currency was seized on the same premises or in the same vehicle where the subject acts occurred or where evidence of said acts was developed or recovered; or

(II)Said amount of currency was seized from the possession or control of a person engaged in said acts; or

(III)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(1) Whenever clear and convincing
evidence adduced in an action pursuant to this part 5 shows a substantial
connection between currency and the acts specified in section 16-13-503, a
rebuttable presumption shall arise that said currency is contraband property. A
substantial connection exists if:

(a) Currency in the aggregate amount of one thousand dollars or more was
seized at or close to the time of the occurrence of the subject act or of the recovery
of evidence of the subject act; and

(b) (I) Said amount of currency was seized on the same premises or in the
same vehicle where the subject acts occurred or where evidence of said acts was
developed or recovered; or

(II) Said amount of currency was seized from the possession or control of a
person engaged in said acts; or

(III) Traces of a controlled substance were discovered on the currency or an
animal trained in the olfactory detection of controlled substances indicated the
presence of the odor of a controlled substance on the currency as testified to by an
expert witness.

(1.5) Notwithstanding any other provision of this part 5 to the contrary, the
plaintiff shall have the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, only
the facts that give rise to the presumption that currency is contraband property
pursuant to subsection (1) of this section. However, when a preponderance of
credible evidence is adduced to rebut a presumption that has arisen pursuant to
subsection (1) of this section, the burden of proof shall revert to the plaintiff to
prove, by clear and convincing evidence, the elements of the plaintiff's case with
respect to the currency.

(2) The provisions of subsection (1) of this section shall not be construed so
as to limit the introduction of any other competent evidence offered to prove that
seized currency is contraband property.