Colorado § 19-2.5-1125 - Petitions - special offenders.

§ 19-2.5-1125. Petitions - special offenders.

(1) Mandatory sentence offender. A juvenile is a mandatory sentence offender if the juvenile:

(a) Has been adjudicated a juvenile delinquent twice; or

(b) Has been adjudicated a juvenile delinquent and if the juvenile's probation has been revoked for a delinquent act, and:

(I) Is subsequently adjudicated a juvenile delinquent; or

(II) Has probation revoked for a delinquent act.

(2) Repeat juvenile offender. A juvenile is a repeat juvenile offender if the juvenile has been previously adjudicated a juvenile delinquent and is adjudicated a juvenile delinquent for a delinquent act that constitutes a felony or if the juvenile's probation is revoked for a delinquent act that constitutes a felony.

(3) Violent juvenile offender. A juvenile is a violent juvenile offender if the juvenile is adjudicated a juvenile delinquent for a delinquent act that constitutes a crime of violence as defined in section 18-1.3-406 (2).

(4) Aggravated juvenile offender.

(a) A juvenile offender is an aggravated juvenile offender if the juvenile is:

(I) Adjudicated a juvenile delinquent for a delinquent act that constitutes a class 1 or class 2 felony or if the juvenile's probation is revoked for a delinquent act that constitutes a class 1 or class 2 felony; or

(II) Adjudicated a juvenile delinquent for a delinquent act that constitutes a felony and either is subsequently adjudicated a juvenile delinquent for a delinquent act that constitutes a crime of violence, as defined in section 18-1.3-406 (2), or has probation revoked for a delinquent act that constitutes a crime of violence, as defined in section 18-1.3-406 (2); or

(III) Adjudicated a juvenile delinquent or if the juvenile's probation is revoked for a delinquent act that constitutes felonious unlawful sexual behavior pursuant to part 4 of article 3 of title 18, incest pursuant to section 18-6-301, or aggravated incest pursuant to section 18-6-302.

(b) Provisions concerning aggravated juvenile offenders are located in sections 19-2.5-503 and 19-2.5-1127.

Source: L. 2021: Entire article added with relocations, (SB 21-059), ch. 136, p. 659, § 2, effective October 1.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 19-2-516 as it existed prior to 2021.

ANNOTATION

Annotator's note. The following annotations include cases decided under former provisions similar to this section.

Statute meets equal protection and due process requirements. Statutory scheme under which juvenile may be classified as mandatory sentence offender either upon probation revocation or upon new adjudication of delinquency and under which prosecutor has discretion to seek revocation rather than new adjudication, thus avoiding necessity for preliminary hearing and jury trial, does not deny juveniles equal protection nor unconstitutionally delegate discretion to prosecutor. People in Interest of D.G., 733 P.2d 1199 (Colo. 1987).

Because former § 19-2-703 (4) provides for notice and a hearing when a juvenile has allegedly violated probation and because the prosecution must establish the alleged criminal offense beyond a reasonable doubt, the statutory scheme under which probation revocation triggers mandatory sentence offender status does not deny due process. People in Interest of D.G., 733 P.2d 1199 (Colo. 1987).

Constitutionally void dispositions cannot be used as basis for enhanced punishment. Where the referee in two prior delinquency hearings failed to comply with the mandates of C.R.J.P. 3, the prior dispositions are constitutionally void and cannot be used as the basis for enhanced punishment proceedings under this section. People v. M.A.W., 651 P.2d 433 (Colo. App. 1982).

Previous adjudication need not be based on felony. The unambiguous language of former subsection (2)(b) requires two prior acts by a child each of which would have constituted a crime if committed by an adult; there is no merit in the contention that the subsection must be read to include the definition of a repeat juvenile offender (former § 19-1-103 (23.5)) that would require one of the previous adjudications to be based on a felony. People in Interest of R.R., 43 Colo. App. 208, 607 P.2d 1013 (1979).

A juvenile does not qualify as a mandatory sentence offender or a repeat juvenile offender when the multiple adjudications required by those provisions occur in the same hearing. A guilty plea that the court accepts plainly constitutes an adjudication under the statute; however, to be a mandatory sentence offender, a juvenile must, after having "been adjudicated a juvenile delinquent twice", be "subsequently adjudicated a juvenile delinquent". To be a repeat juvenile offender, he or she must have "been previously adjudicated a juvenile delinquent"."Subsequently" and "previously" entail the passage of enough time for the juvenile to experience the consequences of his or her earlier adjudications. People in Interest of J.C., 2018 COA 22, 428 P.3d 617.

Subsection (1) makes no reference to the date of the commission of the offense underlying the prior adjudications. Although the delinquent act at issue occurred before the defendant's two previous adjudications as a juvenile delinquent, the statute requires only that a juvenile be adjudicated delinquent after the entry of two prior delinquency adjudications. People ex rel. J.C.P., 151 P.3d 635 (Colo. App. 2006).

The violent juvenile offender statute does not create a separate and distinct offense; rather, it is a dispositional statute associated with the underlying delinquent act and thus does not violate this constitutional guarantee of equal protection. People in Interest of D.G., 725 P.2d 1166 (Colo. App. 1986).

Juvenile's right to equal protection was not violated by trial court's refusal to grant juvenile, who was charged as being a violent juvenile offender, five rather than four peremptory challenges where juvenile failed to show that there was unequal treatment within the class of violent juvenile offenders. Although an aggravated juvenile offender is entitled to five peremptory challenges under former § 19-2-804 (4)(b)(I) (now § 19-2-601 (3)(b)(I)), the elements constituting an aggravated juvenile offender differ from those constituting a violent juvenile offender. People in Interest of M.M.O.P., 873 P.2d 24 (Colo. App. 1993).

Although violent juvenile offender was granted four rather than the five peremptory challenges awarded to an aggravated juvenile offender, violent juvenile offender's right to equal protection was not violated where the elements constituting an aggravated juvenile offender differ from those constituting a violent juvenile offender. People in Interest of M.M.O.P., 873 P.2d 24 (Colo. App. 1993).

Plain language of the statute does not require extra procedural requirements for enhanced sentencing of mandatory sentence offenders; state need not plead and prove previous adjudications beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. J.J.H., 17 P.3d 159 (Colo. 2001).

Comparison to adult habitual criminal prosecution not persuasive in interpreting the procedures for sentencing mandatory sentence offenders, since there are fundamental differences between the juvenile system of justice and the adult system of justice; the goals of the juvenile system are to remain informal, flexible, and focused on rehabilitation, whereas, the adult criminal system's approach is hardened in procedures, goals, and penalties. People v. J.J.H., 17 P.3d 159 (Colo. 2001).