CO Code § 35-43-207 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 35 - Agriculture|Article 43 - Branding and Herding|Part 2 - Brand Inspection|§ 35-43-207. Sales by Persons Other Than Slaughterers - Requirements

 It is unlawful for any person to sell or offer for sale or to possess, except as specifically provided in this article or in article 33 of this title, a carcass of livestock or any portion of such carcass without first exhibiting the hide intact and exposing the brand upon the hide, if any, to the purchaser. It is the duty of any such person selling or offering for sale any such carcass of livestock to preserve the hide of the same for a period of thirty days, unless the hide from such a carcass of livestock has been previously inspected and released by a duly authorized Colorado brand inspector, and to exhibit the same for inspection upon demand of any person.   History. Source: L. 2009: Entire part added with relocations,(SB 09-151), ch. 89, p. 344, § 2, effective July 1.    Editor's note:   This section is similar to former § 12-11-104 as it existed prior to 2009.   ANNOTATION   Annotator's note. Since § 35-43-207 is similar to § 12-11-104 as it existed prior to the 2009 amendment relocating article 11 of title 12 to part 2 of article 43 of title 35, relevant cases construing that provision have been included in the annotations to this section.   Section deemed constitutional. Eachus v. People, 124 Colo. 454 , 238 P.2d 885 (1951), appeal dismissed per curiam, 342 U.S. 938, 72 S. Ct. 562, 96 L. Ed. 698 (1952).   This section is in the nature of a police regulation. Eachus v. People, 124 Colo. 454 , 238 P.2d 885 (1951), appeal dismissed per curiam, 342 U.S. 938, 72 S. Ct. 562, 96 L. Ed. 698 (1952).   It was adopted by the general assembly in behalf of the livestock industry of Colorado, and is designed to assist in the prevention of larceny of livestock. Eachus v. People, 124 Colo. 454 , 238 P.2d 885 (1951), appeal dismissed per curiam, 342 U.S. 938, 72 S. Ct. 562, 96 L. Ed. 698 (1952).   This section, when construed with §§ 12-11-105 and 12-11-109 , creates three separate offenses. Eachus v. People, 124 Colo. 454 , 238 P.2d 885 (1951), appeal dismissed per curiam, 342 U.S. 938, 72 S. Ct. 562, 96 L. Ed. 698 (1952).   In a prosecution for violation of this section, an instruction which would require the people to prove a demand by some person to see the hide of the animal would be erroneous, since the section makes it unlawful for the seller of the carcass to offer the meat for sale without “first exhibiting” the hide. Eachus v. People, 124 Colo. 454 , 238 P.2d 885 (1951), appeal dismissed per curiam, 342 U.S. 938, 72 S. Ct. 562, 96 L. Ed. 698 (1952).   An instruction which charges the jurors that they must not only find that the defendant offered the beef for sale without at the time exhibiting the hide intact and exposing the brand thereon, if any, to the said purchaser, but that they also must find that defendant had failed to preserve the hide of the beef for a period of 30 days and, further, that the defendant had failed to exhibit the same for inspection of any person within said period of 30 days, places an undue burden upon the prosecution and is to the great benefit and advantage of defendant. Eachus v. People, 124 Colo. 454 , 238 P.2d 885 (1951), appeal dismissed per curiam, 342 U.S. 938, 72 S. Ct. 562, 96 L. Ed. 698 (1952).   Where an information is substantially in the language of this section, even though it contains several distinct offenses, and the jury of necessity must have found defendant guilty of all, he can claim no prejudice because of conviction of one. Eachus v. People, 124 Colo. 454 , 238 P.2d 885 (1951), appeal dismissed per curiam, 342 U.S. 938, 72 S. Ct. 562, 96 L. Ed. 698 (1952).