(1)If the allegation of previous convictions of
other felony offenses is included in an indictment or information and if a verdict of
guilty of the substantive offense with which the defendant is charged is returned,
the court shall conduct a separate habitual proceeding for a jury to determine
whether or not the defendant has suffered the alleged previous felony convictions,
whether the convictions were separately brought and tried, and whether the
convictions arose out of separate and distinct criminal episodes. The habitual
proceeding must be conducted before the same jury impaneled to try the
substantive offense; except that, when necessary and as constitutionally
permissible, a new jury may be impaneled. If a new jury is impaneled, the court shall
hold the habitual proceedi
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
(1) If the allegation of previous convictions of
other felony offenses is included in an indictment or information and if a verdict of
guilty of the substantive offense with which the defendant is charged is returned,
the court shall conduct a separate habitual proceeding for a jury to determine
whether or not the defendant has suffered the alleged previous felony convictions,
whether the convictions were separately brought and tried, and whether the
convictions arose out of separate and distinct criminal episodes. The habitual
proceeding must be conducted before the same jury impaneled to try the
substantive offense; except that, when necessary and as constitutionally
permissible, a new jury may be impaneled. If a new jury is impaneled, the court shall
hold the habitual proceeding as soon as practicable. The Colorado rules of evidence
and Colorado rules of criminal procedure, including the discovery provisions of
Colorado rule of criminal procedure 16, fully apply to habitual proceedings
conducted pursuant to this section.
(2) An information or indictment seeking the increased penalties authorized
by section 18-1.3-801 shall identify by separate counts each alleged former
conviction and shall allege that the defendant on a date and at a place specified
was convicted of a specific felony. If any such conviction was had outside this state,
the information or indictment shall allege that the offense, if committed in this
state, would be a felony.
(3) Upon arraignment of the defendant, such defendant shall be required to
admit or deny that such defendant has been previously convicted of the crimes
identified in the information or indictment. If the defendant refuses to admit or deny
the previous convictions, such refusal shall be treated as a denial by such
defendant that the defendant has been convicted as alleged. If the defendant
admits to having been convicted as alleged in any count charging a previous
conviction, no proof of such previous conviction is required. Such admission shall
constitute conclusive proof in determining whether the defendant has been
previously convicted of an alleged felony and the court shall sentence the
defendant in accordance with section 18-1.3-801.
(4) If the defendant denies that they have been previously convicted as
alleged in any count of an information or indictment, a jury shall determine by
separate habitual proceeding and verdict whether the defendant has been
convicted as alleged, whether the convictions were separately brought and tried,
and whether the convictions arose out of separate and distinct criminal episodes.
The procedure is as follows:
(a) The jury shall render a verdict upon the issue of the defendant's guilt or
innocence of the substantive offense charged;
(b) If the verdict is that the defendant is guilty of the substantive offense
charged, a jury shall try the issues of whether the defendant has been previously
convicted as alleged. The prosecuting attorney has the burden of proving beyond a
reasonable doubt that the defendant has been previously convicted as alleged, the
convictions were separately brought and tried, and the convictions arose out of
separate and distinct criminal episodes.
(5) (a) If, upon the trial of the issues upon the substantive offense charged,
the defendant testifies in his or her own defense and denies that he or she has been
previously convicted as alleged, the prosecuting attorney on rebuttal may present
all evidence relevant to the issues of previous convictions for the sole purpose of
impeachment of the defendant's credibility, subject to the rules governing
admission of evidence at criminal trials.
(b) If, upon the trial of the issues upon the substantive offense charged, the
prosecuting attorney presents rebuttal evidence pursuant to subsection (5)(a) of
this section or the defendant admits that the defendant has been previously
convicted as alleged, the presentation or admission does not relieve the
prosecuting attorney of the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant has been previously convicted as alleged, the convictions were
separately brought and tried, and the convictions arose out of separate and distinct
criminal episodes. If, during the trial on the substantive offense, the jury has heard
the defendant admit a previous conviction, the court shall instruct the jury that it
may consider the admission only as it affects the defendant's credibility and that
the prosecuting attorney must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant's
prior convictions by evidence independent of the admission.
(6) Repealed.