CO Code § 18-1.3-701 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 18 - Criminal Code|Article 1.3 - Sentencing in Criminal Cases|Part 7 - Fines and Costs|§ 18-1.3-701. Judgment of Costs and Fines - Definitions

     When any person, association, or corporation is convicted of an offense, the court shall give judgment in favor of the state of Colorado, the appropriate prosecuting attorney, or the appropriate law enforcement agency and against the offender for the amount of the costs of prosecution, the amount of the cost of care, and any fine imposed. When any juvenile is adjudicated a juvenile delinquent for the commission of an act that would have been a criminal offense if committed by an adult, the court may give judgment in favor of the state of Colorado for any fine imposed. The court shall not impose costs of prosecution or cost of care against a juvenile under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, as defined in section 19-1-103, or against the person's parent, guardian, or legal custodian, except as required pursuant to title IV of the federal “Social Security Act”. No fine shall be imposed for conviction of a felony except as provided in section 18-1.3-401 or 18-7-203 (2)(a). Such judgments are enforceable in the same manner as are civil judgments, and, in addition, sections 16-11-101.6 and 18-1.3-702 apply. A county clerk and recorder may not charge a fee for the recording of a transcript or satisfaction of a judgment entered pursuant to this section.    Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection (1), on and after July 1, 2010, all judgments collected pursuant to this section for fees and court costs shall be transmitted to the state treasurer for deposit in the judicial stabilization cash fund created in section 13-32-101 (6), C.R.S.    Judgments collected pursuant to this section for fees for auxiliary services provided pursuant to section 13-90-204, and reimbursed pursuant to section 13-90-210, shall be remitted to the Colorado commission for the deaf, hard of hearing, and deafblind in the department of human services created in section 26-21-104.       The costs assessed pursuant to subsection (1) of this section or section 16-18-101 may only be imposed against a person convicted of a crime committed when the person was eighteen years of age or older and may include:   Any docket fee required by article 32 of title 13, C.R.S., or any other fee or tax required by statute to be paid to the clerk of the court;    The jury fee required by section 13-71-144, C.R.S.;    Any fees required to be paid to sheriffs pursuant to section 30-1-104, C.R.S.;    Any fees of the court reporter for all or any part of a transcript necessarily obtained for use in the case, including the fees provided for in section 16-18-101 (2), C.R.S., and including the fees for a transcript of any preliminary hearing;  (d.5) The actual costs paid to any expert witness;       The witness fees and mileage paid pursuant to article 33 of title 13, C.R.S., and section 16-9-203, C.R.S.; (e) (I) The witness fees and mileage paid pursuant to article 33 of title 13, C.R.S., and section 16-9-203, C.R.S.;    For any person required to travel more than fifty miles from the person's place of residence to the place where specified in the subpoena, in addition to the witness fee and mileage specified in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (e):   Actual lodging expenses incurred; and    Actual rental car, taxi, or other transportation costs incurred;  (e.5) If a person under eighteen years of age is required to appear, the amount that a parent or guardian of the person was paid for transportation and lodging expenses incurred while accompanying the person;           Any fees for exemplification and copies of papers necessarily obtained for use in the case;    Any costs of taking depositions for the perpetuation of testimony, including reporter's fees, witness fees, expert witness fees, mileage for witnesses, and sheriff fees for service of subpoenas;    Any statutory fees for service of process or statutory fees for any required publications;  (h.5) Any fees for interpreters required during depositions or during trials;     Any item specifically authorized by statute to be included as part of the costs;    Repealed.  (j.5) On proper motion of the prosecuting attorney and at the discretion of the court, any other reasonable and necessary costs incurred by the prosecuting attorney or law enforcement agency that are directly the result of the successful prosecution of the defendant, including the costs resulting from the collection and analysis of any chemical test upon the defendant pursuant to section 42-4-1301.1 , which costs the court shall assess against the defendant, collect from the defendant, and transfer to the prosecuting attorney or law enforcement agency.     Any costs incurred in obtaining a governor's warrant pursuant to section 16-19-108, C.R.S.;    Any costs incurred by the law enforcement agency in photocopying reports, developing film, and purchasing videotape as necessary for use in the case;    Any costs of participation in a diversion program if the offender unsuccessfully participated in a diversion program prior to the conviction.       Where any person, association, or corporation is granted probation, the court shall order the offender to make such payments toward the cost of care as are appropriate under the circumstances. In setting the amount of such payments, the court shall take into consideration and make allowances for any restitution ordered to the victim or victims of a crime, which shall take priority over any payments ordered pursuant to this article, and for the maintenance and support of the offender's spouse, dependent children, or other persons having a legal right to support and maintenance from the estate of the offender. If the court determines that the offender has a sufficient estate to pay all or part of the cost of care, the court shall determine the amount which shall be paid by the offender for the cost of care, which amount shall in no event be in excess of the per capita cost of supervising an offender on probation.    Where any person is sentenced to a term of imprisonment, whether to a county jail or the department of corrections, the court shall order such person to make such payments toward the cost of care as are appropriate under the circumstances. In setting the amount of such payments, the court shall take into consideration and make allowances for any restitution ordered to the victim or victims of a crime, which shall take priority over any payments ordered pursuant to this article, and for the maintenance and support of the inmate's spouse, dependent children, or any other persons having a legal right to support and maintenance out of the offender's estate. The court shall also consider the financial needs of the offender for the six-month period immediately following the offender's release, for the purpose of allowing said offender to seek employment. If the court determines that the person has a sufficient estate to pay all or part of the cost of care, the court shall determine the amount which shall be paid by the offender, which amount in no event shall be in excess of the per capita cost of maintaining prisoners in the institution or facility in which the offender has been residing prior to sentencing for the purpose of reimbursing the appropriate law enforcement agency and the per capita cost of maintaining prisoners in the department of corrections for the purpose of paying the cost of care after sentencing. (4.5) Notwithstanding the entry of an order of expungement pursuant to section 19-1-306 , the provisions of this part 7 apply.    As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires:   “Cost of care” means the cost to the department or the local government charged with the custody of an offender for providing room, board, clothing, medical care, and other normal living expenses for an offender confined to a jail or correctional facility, or any costs associated with maintaining an offender in a home detention program contracted for by the department of public safety, as determined by the executive director of the department of corrections or the executive director of the department of public safety, whichever is appropriate, or the cost of supervision of probation when the offender is granted probation, or the cost of supervision of parole when the offender is placed on parole by the state board of parole, as determined by the court.    “Estate” means any tangible or intangible properties, real or personal, belonging to or due to an offender, including income or payments to such person received or earned prior to or during incarceration from salary or wages, bonuses, annuities, pensions, or retirement benefits, or any source whatsoever except federal benefits of any kind. Real property that is held in joint ownership or ownership in common with an offender's spouse, while being used and occupied by the spouse as a place of residence, shall not be considered a part of the estate of the offender for the purposes of this section.       After the set-offs for restitution and for maintenance and support as provided in subsection (4) of this section, any amounts recovered pursuant to this section that are available to reimburse the costs of providing medical care shall be used to reimburse the state for the state's financial participation for medical assistance if medical care is provided for the inmate or an infant of a female inmate under the “Colorado Medical Assistance Act”, articles 4, 5, and 6 of title 25.5, C.R.S.      History. Source: L. 2002: Entire article added with relocations, p. 1422, § 2, effective October 1. L. 2003: (1) amended, p. 1693, § 1, effective August 6. L. 2006: (1) amended, p. 1091, § 11, effective May 25; (6) amended, p. 2005, § 61, effective July 1. L. 2007: (1) amended, p. 1538, § 29, effective May 31. L. 2008: (1)(b) amended, p. 2146, § 21, effective June 4. L. 2011: (1)(a) amended,(SB 11-085), ch. 257, p. 1129, § 6, effective August 10. L. 2016: (2)(j) amended and (2)(j.5) added,(HB 16-1378), ch. 303, p. 1221, § 1, effective August 10. L. 2017: IP(2) and (2)(j.5) amended and (2)(j) repealed,(HB 17-1252), ch. 367, p. 1912, § 1, effective August 9; (4.5) added,(HB 17-1204), ch. 206, p. 784, § 4, effective November 1. L. 2018: (1)(c) amended,(HB 18-1108), ch. 303, p. 1836, § 8, effective August 8. L. 2021: (1)(a), IP(2), and (2)(m) amended,(HB 21-1315), ch. 461, p. 3106, § 3, effective July 6.    Editor's note:   This section is similar to former § 16-11-501 as it existed prior to 2002.   Cross references:    For items includable as costs in civil actions, see § 13-16-122.    For the legislative declaration in the 2008 act amending subsection (1)(b), see section 1 of chapter 417, Session Laws of Colorado 2008. For the legislative declaration in the 2011 act amending subsection (1)(a), see section 1 of chapter 257, Session Laws of Colorado 2011. For the legislative declaration in HB 21-1315, see section 1 of chapter 461, Session Laws of Colorado 2021.     ANNOTATION   Annotator's note. Since § 18-1.3-701 is similar to § 16-11-501 as it existed prior to the 2002 relocation of certain criminal sentencing provisions and repealed laws antecedent to CSA, C. 48, 516, relevant cases construing those provisions have been included in the annotations to this section.   Constitutionality. Statutes imposing liability for costs on a convicted defendant have been uniformly held to be constitutional. People v. Fisher, 189 Colo. 297 , 539 P.2d 1258 (1975).   No double jeopardy violation where the imposition of costs is primarily remedial rather than punitive. The reviewing court first considers if the legislature intended a criminal or civil sanction, then determines if the statutory scheme is primarily punitive. People v. Howell, 64 P.3d 894 (Colo. App. 2002).   Costs are imposed to reimburse the state for the actual expenses incurred in prosecuting a defendant; costs are not traditionally considered to be punishment; the imposition of costs does not serve the goals of retribution and deterrence. People v. Howell, 64 P.3d 894 (Colo. App. 2002).   Sixth amendment inapplicable. The sixth amendment of the constitution compels appointing counsel for indigent defendants but does not speak to whether convicted defendants of limited resources may be charged with the costs of their trial. People v. Fisher, 189 Colo. 297 , 539 P.2d 1258 (1975).   Declaration of indigency differs. Whether a presumably innocent defendant is declared indigent for the purposes of appointing counsel before he is brought to trial involves different considerations than the question of whether a convicted defendant may be charged with the costs expended by the state to secure his conviction. People v. Fisher, 189 Colo. 297 , 539 P.2d 1258 (1975).   Judgment for costs must be rendered against defendant upon conviction. Bransom v. Bd. of Comm'rs, 5 Colo. App. 231, 37 P. 957 (1894).   This changes the doctrine of the common law. In authorizing a recovery by the people against a convicted defendant of the costs incurred to secure his conviction, it was a departure from the doctrine of the common law. Bd. of Comm'rs v. Wilson, 3 Colo. App. 492, 34 P. 265 (1893).   Costs are a matter of statute under this section. Glavino v. People, 75 Colo. 94 , 224 P. 225 (1924).   And are not to be taxed according to plea agreement. The costs in a criminal case must be taxed according to statutes and not according to any plea agreement. People v. Fisher, 189 Colo. 297 , 539 P.2d 1258 (1975).   There is no restriction or limit to the amount of costs of prosecution, only that the items of cost must necessarily conform to the fee bill, and that the charge for each service shall not exceed the amount allowed. The whole matter has been left to the discretion of the prosecutor and the court. Parker v. People, 7 Colo. App. 56, 42 P. 172 (1895).   A defendant convicted of fewer than all of the counts in a multi-count indictment or criminal information, or in consolidated cases, can be assessed only those costs of prosecution attributable to the counts for which the defendant is actually convicted, if an allocation is practicable. People v. Palomo, 272 P.3d 1106 (Colo. App. 2011); People v. Trujillo, 2018 COA 12 , 433 P.3d 78.   Extradition expenses fall within subsection (2)(j). People v. Fogarty, 126 P.3d 238 (Colo. App. 2005).   And are not subject to a time limitation. The phrase “[w]here any person...is convicted” means nothing more than “under conditions or in circumstances in which a person is convicted of an offense”. The prosecution does not have an unlimited time, however, to seek expenses for extradition costs. People v. Scoggins, 240 P.3d 331 (Colo. App. 2009), aff'd by an equally divided court, 2012 CO 16, 271 P.3d 515.   Cost of sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE) examination qualifies for restitution under statute as an “extraordinary” direct public or private investigative cost. Teague v. People, 2017 CO 66, 395 P.3d 782.   “Costs of prosecution” relate to the costs of a formal criminal proceeding. Court erred in awarding police department medical costs associated with defendant's hospital treatment relating to injuries defendant sustained during a resisted arrest and the police's use of a taser on defendant. Arrest does not constitute prosecution under the statute. Medical treatment was provided before defendant was formally charged and before criminal proceedings began. People v. Sinovcic, 2013 COA 38 , 304 P.3d 1176.   And post-arrest hospital costs are not “costs of care” under the statute. “Custody” refers to custody, following sentencing, in a jail or correctional facility. Defendant had not yet been booked into county jail, nor had he been sentenced, at the time he received medical treatment for injuries resulting from resisting arrest. People v. Sinovcic, 2013 COA 38 , 304 P.3d 1176.   Judicial discretion. The general rule as to payment of costs may be avoided if the trial judge, in his discretion, determines that the defendant is unable to pay the costs. People v. Fisher, 189 Colo. 297 , 539 P.2d 1258 (1975).   Joint defendants are severally liable for costs. Inasmuch as the costs are merely incident to the judgment, joint defendants are severally liable for the costs incurred in procuring their respective convictions, not for the costs of each other, nor for costs made by the people against them respectively. Murphy v. People, 3 Colo. 147 (1876).   Judgment rendered against person convicted is a lien on his property. In case of a conviction in a criminal proceeding judgment must be rendered against the defendant for the costs of the prosecution, and when rendered, is a lien upon his property, if he has any, and is collected by execution. Bransom v. Bd. of Comm'rs, 5 Colo. App. 231, 37 P. 957 (1894).   Although it becomes the duty of parole board to provide, as a condition of parole, that offender make restitution to the victim or victim's immediate family, it is error for court to require that defendant pay restitution to the police of cost of extradition. The proper way to effectuate this result is for court to enter judgment in favor of state of Colorado for amount of costs of prosecution under § 16-1-501 . People v. Lemons, 824 P.2d 56 (Colo. App. 1991).   This section is not applicable to a juvenile who is adjudicated delinquent. People v. T.R., 860 P.2d 559 (Colo. App. 1993).