2021 Colorado Code
Title 18 - Criminal Code
Article 1.3 - Sentencing in Criminal Cases
Part 3 - Community Corrections and Specialized Restitution and Community Service Programs
§ 18-1.3-301. Authority to Place Offenders in Community Corrections Programs

1. 1. A judge of a district court may refer an offender convicted of a felony to a community corrections program unless the offender is required to be sentenced pursuant to section 18-1.3-406 (1) or a sentencing provision that requires a sentence to the department of corrections. If an offender who is sentenced pursuant to section 18-1.3-406 (1) has such sentence modified upon the finding of unusual and extenuating circumstances pursuant to such section, the offender may be referred to a community corrections program if the offender is otherwise eligible for such program and is approved for placement pursuant to section 17-27-103 (5) and section 17-27-104 (3). For the purposes of this article 1.3, persons sentenced pursuant to sections 19-2.5-1118 (2) and 19-2.5-1126 (1)(a)(I) and (1)(c)(I)(B) are deemed to be offenders.
   2. In making a direct sentence to a community corrections program, the sentencing court may impose a sentence to community corrections which includes terms, lengths, and conditions pursuant to section 18-1.3-401. The sentencing court may also refer any offender to a community corrections program as a condition of probation pursuant to section 18-1.3-202. Any placement of offenders referred as a direct sentence or as a condition of probation shall be subject to approval pursuant to section 17-27-103 (5), C.R.S., and section 17-27-104 (3), C.R.S.

      (b.5) As a condition of every placement in a community corrections program, the court shall require the offender, as a condition of placement, to execute or subscribe a written prior waiver of extradition stating that the offender consents to extradition to this state and waives all formal procedures incidental to extradition proceedings in the event that the offender is arrested in another state upon an allegation that the offender has violated the terms of his or her community corrections placement, and acknowledging that the offender shall not be admitted to bail in any other state pending extradition to this state.

   3. A probation officer, in making a presentence report to the court pursuant to section 16-11-102, C.R.S., or in making a report to the court after a probation violation, may recommend the utilization of a community corrections program in sentencing or resentencing an offender.
   4. If an offender is rejected by a community corrections board or a community corrections program before placement in a program, the court shall promptly resentence the offender. If a sentence to the department of corrections was imposed upon the offender prior to the referral of the offender to community corrections, the resentence shall not exceed the sentence which was originally imposed upon the offender.
   5. If an offender is rejected after acceptance by a community corrections board or a community corrections program, the court may resentence the offender without any further hearing so long as the offender's sentence does not exceed the sentence which was originally imposed upon the offender.
   6. The probation department of the judicial district in which a community corrections program is located shall have jurisdiction over all offenders sentenced directly to a community corrections program. Such probation department shall initiate arrest warrants, process reports or other official documents regarding offenders at the direction of the court, coordinate with community corrections boards and community corrections programs, review offender supervision and treatment, authorize offender transfers between residential and nonresidential phases of placement, and carry out such other duties as the court directs.
   7. The sentencing court may make appropriate orders for the detention, transfer, or resentencing of any offender whose placement in a community corrections program is terminated pursuant to section 17-27-103 (7) or section 17-27-104 (5). As to any offender held pursuant to section 17-27-104 (6) in a jail operated by a unit of local government in a county other than where the offender's original conviction occurred, the sentencing court shall order the transfer of the offender to the jail of the county where the original conviction occurred as soon as possible. The sentencing court shall provide the offender with a new sentencing hearing, for any termination from a community corrections program, including a violation of section 18-8-208.2. At any new sentencing hearing, the court may consider any sentencing alternative originally available to the court when ordering the appropriate sentence.

      (g.5) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, if an offender is terminated or rejected from a community corrections program after having been sentenced to the program for a level 4 drug felony, the court shall conduct a resentencing hearing in order to comply with each exhaustion of remedy provision in section 18-1.3-104.5 or shall make written findings regarding resentencing after consideration of all the information provided to the court pursuant to section 18-1.3-104.5 (2)(c). Nothing in this section requires that a community corrections program accept or maintain an offender who has been terminated from a community corrections program.

   8. 1. The sentencing court shall have the authority to modify the sentence of an offender who has been directly sentenced to a community corrections program in the same manner as if the offender had been placed on probation. (h) (I) The sentencing court shall have the authority to modify the sentence of an offender who has been directly sentenced to a community corrections program in the same manner as if the offender had been placed on probation.
      2. A defendant who successfully completes the residential phase of a community corrections sentence, has paid the costs of the residential program in full, and is being supervised on nonresidential status at either a minimum or administrative level is eligible for consideration for early termination of his or her community corrections sentence by the court.
      3. When the defendant has met the eligibility criteria enumerated in subparagraph (II) of this paragraph (h), the defendant's probation officer shall submit a petition for early termination of sentence to the court and notify the district attorney and the defendant.
      4. If victim notification is required, the probation officer shall provide victim notification pursuant to part 3 of article 4.1 of title 24, C.R.S.
      5. In determining whether to grant or deny the petition, the court may consider the following factors:
         1. The defendant's assessed risk of reoffense;
         2. Victim input, if any;
         3. The defendant's compliance with the terms and conditions of the sentence or community corrections program;
         4. Completion of any treatment required by the court or community corrections program; and
         5. Other factors deemed relevant by the court.

      6. The fact that the defendant owes restitution, costs, fees, fines, or surcharges shall not prohibit the court from granting the motion for early termination if the court finds the motion otherwise appropriate.

   9. 1. An offender sentenced directly to a community corrections program by the sentencing court pursuant to this subsection (1) shall be eligible for time credit deductions from the offender's sentence not to exceed ten days for each month of placement upon a demonstration to the program administrator by the offender that the offender has made consistent progress in the following categories: (i) (I) An offender sentenced directly to a community corrections program by the sentencing court pursuant to this subsection (1) shall be eligible for time credit deductions from the offender's sentence not to exceed ten days for each month of placement upon a demonstration to the program administrator by the offender that the offender has made consistent progress in the following categories:
         1. Maintenance of employment, education, or training, including attendance, promptness, performance, cooperation, care of materials, and safety;
         2. Development and maintenance of positive social and domestic relations;
         3. Compliance with rules, regulations, and requirements of residential or nonresidential program placement;
         4. Completion and compliance with components of the individualized program plan; and
         5. Demonstration of financial responsibility and accountability.

      2. The administrator of each community corrections program shall develop objective standards for measuring progress in the categories listed in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (i), shall apply such standards consistently to evaluations of all such offenders, and shall develop procedures for recommending the award of time credits to such offenders.
      3. The administrator of each community corrections program shall review the performance record of each offender directly sentenced to such program. Such review shall be conducted at intervals to be determined by each program administrator. Such reviews shall be conducted at least once every six months, but may be conducted at more frequent intervals as determined by the program administrator. If the program administrator determines that the offender engaged in criminal activity during the time period for which the time credits were granted, the program administrator may withdraw the time credits granted during such period. Prior to the time of the offender's release, the program administrator shall submit to the sentencing court the time credit deductions granted, withdrawn, or restored consistent with the provisions of this paragraph (i). Such time credit deductions shall be submitted on standardized forms prepared by the division of criminal justice of the department of public safety that include verification by the program administrator that the time credit deductions are true and accurate. The sentencing court shall certify such time credit deductions as part of the offender's permanent record. Any time credits authorized under this paragraph (i) shall vest upon certification of time credit deductions by the sentencing court at the time of the offender's release from the program.
      4. An offender shall not be credited with more than one-half the allowable time credits for any month or portion thereof unless the offender was employed, was unable to be employed due to a disability waiver, or was participating in training, education, or treatment programs which precluded the ability to remain employed. This subparagraph (IV) shall not apply to those offenders excused from such employment or training by the program administrator or for medical reasons.
      5. No time credit deductions shall be granted to any offender for time spent in jail, whether awaiting sentencing, placement in the program, disciplinary action, or as a result of a subsequent arrest, unless such time spent in jail was a prearranged component of the offender's individualized program plan and the offender has made consistent progress in the categories listed in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (i).
      6. (Deleted by amendment, L. 2011, (SB 11-254), ch. 274, p. 1236, § 1, effective June 2, 2011.)

   10. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (k) of this subsection (1), any offender sentenced to the department of corrections subsequent to placement in a community corrections program is entitled to credit against the term of confinement as described in section 17-27-104 (9), C.R.S. The court shall make a finding of the amount of such time credits and include such finding in the mittimus that orders the offender to be placed in the custody of the department of corrections. The department of corrections shall apply credits for residential and nonresidential time completed in a community corrections program in the same manner as credits for time served in a department of corrections facility.
   11. Any offender who escapes from a residential community corrections program or who absconds from a nonresidential community corrections program shall forfeit any time credit deductions earned pursuant to paragraph (i) of this subsection (1) and shall not be credited with any time on escape or absconder status. Within thirty-five days after an offender's escape or abscondment, the program administrator shall submit to the sentencing court a statement on the form described in subparagraph (III) of paragraph (i) of this subsection (1) of the time credit deductions that would have been earned by the offender.

2. 1. 1. Initial referral. The executive director of the department of corrections may transfer any offender who is eligible pursuant to this subsection (2) to a community corrections program if such offender is accepted for placement by a community corrections board pursuant to section 17-27-103, and a community corrections program pursuant to section 17-27-104. (a) (I) Initial referral. The executive director of the department of corrections may transfer any offender who is eligible pursuant to this subsection (2) to a community corrections program if such offender is accepted for placement by a community corrections board pursuant to section 17-27-103, and a community corrections program pursuant to section 17-27-104.
      2. When the executive director makes a referral or subsequent referral request, the referral packet must include the following related to the offender:
         1. A current risk and needs assessment that was administered in the last twelve months;
         2. Projected release dates;
         3. Prior supervision outcomes;
         4. Institutional programming recommendations including participation and completion information;
         5. A verified parole plan or community plan;
         6. A victim statement, if applicable;
         7. An offender statement, if submitted;
         8. The parole board action sheet, if applicable;
         9. A recommendation or the reason why placement is or is not recommended from the case manager for the community placement based on an individualized review that considers risk, institutional conduct, and responsivity factors;

   2. Unless the offender has an active felony warrant or detainer or has refused community placement, the executive director of the department of corrections shall refer an offender who has displayed acceptable institutional behavior for placement in a community corrections program according to the following timeline:
      1. Repealed.
      2. No more than sixteen months prior to the offender's parole eligibility date for any offender who is not serving a sentence for an offense referred to in section 18-1.3-406; and
      3. No more than one hundred eighty days prior to the parole eligibility date for any other offender not described in subsection (2)(b)(II) of this section.
      4. (A) When an offender is denied placement in a community corrections program, the executive director shall make a subsequent referral for that offender who is eligible pursuant to subsection (2)(e)(II)(B) of this section no sooner than six months after the denial and no later than twelve months after the denial unless the offender is subject to section 17-2-201 (4)(a).
      5. When an offender refuses placement in a community corrections program, the executive director may make a subsequent referral for the offender, if eligible pursuant to subsection (2)(e)(II)(B) of this section, after the offender informs the executive director that the circumstance that formed the basis for the refusal has changed or resolved.
      6. In making the determination pursuant to subsection (2)(f)(I) of this section, the executive director of the department of corrections shall consider the relevant criteria established pursuant to section 18-1.3-1009 and any other relevant factors.

   3. Prior to placement of an offender in any community corrections program, the executive director of the department of corrections shall give the first right to refuse placement of such offender to the community corrections board and community corrections programs in the community where the offender intends to reside after release from custody of the department of corrections or parole by the state board of parole; except that the first right to refuse does not apply if the executive director seeks to place the offender in a specialized community corrections program or the offender requests a specific community corrections program placement, subject to acceptance by the community corrections board pursuant to section 17-27-103 and the community corrections program pursuant to section 17-27-104.
   4. As to any offender held in a county jail pursuant to section 17-27-104 (6), the executive director of the department of corrections shall order transfer of such offender to a facility of the department of corrections as soon as possible.
   5. Subsequent referrals. (I) For an offender who is serving a sentence for a class 1 or 2 felony that constitutes a crime of violence under section 18-1.3-406, excluding escape, and whose parole hearing has been deferred for at least thirty-six months, the executive director of the department of corrections shall not refer the offender for placement in community corrections earlier than six months prior to the date of the offender's second or any subsequent parole hearing.
   6. Requirements for sex offenders. (I) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the executive director of the department of corrections shall not transfer an offender sentenced pursuant to the “Colorado Sex Offender Lifetime Supervision Act of 1998”, part 10 of this article 1.3, unless:
      1. The offender has successfully progressed in the treatment required by section 16-11.7-105, as determined by the department of corrections after consideration of the criteria developed pursuant to section 18-1.3-1009 (1)(b), and would not pose an undue threat to the community if transferred to a community corrections program under appropriate treatment and monitoring requirements; and
      2. There is a strong and reasonable probability that the offender would not thereafter commit a new criminal offense.

3. The state board of parole may refer any parolee for placement in a community corrections program. Such placement, if approved by the community corrections board pursuant to section 17-27-103, C.R.S., and the community corrections program pursuant to section 17-27-104, C.R.S., may be made a condition of release on parole or as a modification of the conditions of an offender's parole after release or upon temporary revocation of parole pursuant to section 17-2-103 (11), C.R.S.
4. 1. [Editor's note: This version of subsection (4) is effective until March 1, 2022.] District courts, county courts, and other local criminal justice officials may enter into agreements with community corrections programs which include the use of such programs to supervise offenders awaiting trial for felony or misdemeanor offenses, offenders convicted of misdemeanors, or offenders under deferred judgments. Such agreements are subject to review and approval by the community corrections board of the jurisdiction in which any community corrections program making such agreement is located. Any such use of a community corrections program may be supported with funding from local governments, public or private grants, offender fees, and other sources other than the state general fund.
   2. A district court, county court, and any other criminal justice official may enter into agreements with community corrections programs that provide residential drug treatment, for the placement and supervision of offenders as a term and condition of probation when assessed treatment need levels indicate that residential drug treatment is necessary and appropriate. The agreement is subject to review and approval by the community corrections board in the jurisdiction where a community corrections program is located. A community corrections program used pursuant to this paragraph (b) may receive funds from the correctional treatment cash fund, as well as local funding, public or private grants, or offender fees.

(J) The number of prior referrals;

(K) A mental health assessment, if available;

(L) A substance use disorder assessment, if available;

(M) A sex offender assessment, if applicable; and

(N) The specific referral being requested.

(a) [ ] District courts, county courts, and other local criminal justice officials may enter into agreements with community corrections programs which include the use of such programs to supervise offenders awaiting trial for felony or misdemeanor offenses, offenders convicted of misdemeanors, or offenders under deferred judgments, or to accept for residential placement persons convicted of misdemeanor offenses as an alternative sentence to a county jail sentence. Such agreements are subject to review and approval by the community corrections board of the jurisdiction in which any community corrections program making such agreement is located. Any such use of a community corrections program may be supported with funding from local governments, public or private grants, offender fees, and other sources other than the state general fund.

(b) A district court, county court, and any other criminal justice official may enter into agreements with community corrections programs that provide residential substance abuse treatment, for the placement and supervision of offenders as a term and condition of probation when assessed treatment need levels indicate that residential substance abuse treatment is necessary and appropriate. The agreement is subject to review and approval by the community corrections board in the jurisdiction where a community corrections program is located. A community corrections program used pursuant to this subsection (4)(b) may receive funds from the correctional treatment cash fund, as well as local funding, public or private grants, or offender fees.

History. Source: L. 2002: Entire article added with relocations, p. 1386, § 2, effective October 1. L. 2003: (1)(a) amended, p. 1429, § 14, effective April 29. L. 2006: (1)(b.5) added, p. 342, § 6, effective July 1. L. 2011: (1)(h), IP(1)(i)(I), (1)(i)(IV), (1)(i)(VI), (1)(j), and (1)(k) amended,(SB 11-254), ch. 274, pp. 1237, 1236, §§ 3, 1, effective June 2; (2)(b) amended and (2)(e) added,(HB 11-1085), ch. 48, p. 124, § 1, effective August 10. L. 2012: (1)(k) amended,(SB 12-175), ch. 208, p. 865, § 109, effective July 1. L. 2013: (1)(g.5) added and (4) amended,(SB 13-250), ch. 333, p. 1902, § 3, effective October 1. L. 2016: (4)(b) amended,(HB 16-1278), ch. 188, p. 664, § 2, effective May 20. L. 2017: (1)(g.5) amended,(SB 17-294), ch. 264, p. 1393, § 38, effective May 25. L. 2018: (2) amended,(HB 18-1251), ch. 272, p. 1670, § 3, effective August 8. L. 2020: (1)(g) amended,(HB 20-1019), ch. 9, p. 26, § 7, effective March 6; (2)(f) added,(SB 20-085), ch. 245, p. 1176, § 1, effective July 7. L. 2021: (1)(a) amended,(SB 21-059), ch. 136, p. 718, § 41, effective October 1; (4) amended,(SB 21-271), ch. 462, p. 3169, § 184, effective March 1, 2022.

1. This section is similar to former § 17-27-105 as it existed prior to 2002.
2. Section 803(2) of chapter 462 (SB 21-271), Session Laws of Colorado 2021, provides that the act changing this section applies to offenses committed on or after March 1, 2022.

Law reviews. For article, “Colorado Felony Sentencing”, see 11 Colo. Law. 1478 (1982). For article, “Review of New Legislation Relating to Criminal Law”, see 11 Colo. Law. 2148 (1982).

Annotator's note. Since § 18-1.3-301 is similar to § 17-27-105 as it existed prior to the 2002 relocation of certain criminal sentencing provisions, relevant cases construing that provision have been included in the annotations to this section.

Two prior felony convictions do not foreclose a court from sentencing a defendant to a community correctional program. People ex rel. VanMeveren v. District Court, 195 Colo. 34 , 572 P.2d 483 (1977) (decided under repealed § 27-27-105 ).

Individual sentenced pursuant to § 42-2-206 (1) may be considered for community correctional program. People v. Scott, 200 Colo. 365 , 615 P.2d 680 (1980).

Where defendant is serving three concurrent sentences, one of which is for a violent crime, the defendant is not eligible for community corrections placement more than six months before his parole eligibility date. People v. Santisteven, 868 P.2d 415 (Colo. App. 1993).

The parole board, not a parole officer, has the authority to direct that an offender attend a community corrections program as a condition of parole. People v. Lanzieri, 996 P.2d 156 (Colo. App. 1999), rev'd on other grounds, 25 P.3d 1170 (Colo. 2001).

Sentence to community correctional facility is not the same as a sentence to probation. People v. Johnson, 42 Colo. App. 350, 594 P.2d 601 (1979); People v. Kastning, 738 P.2d 807 (Colo. App. 1987).

“Original sentence” construed. Where court suspended the execution, but not the imposition, of a four-year term in the department of corrections on condition that defendant serve two years in a community corrections facility, the court was not thereafter precluded from resentencing defendant to four years in the department because the “original sentence” was four years, not two. People v. Seals, 899 P.2d 359 (Colo. App. 1995).

Court cannot increase original sentence. There is nothing in this article which authorizes the court to increase the length of the original sentence. People v. Johnson, 42 Colo. App. 350, 594 P.2d 601 (1979).

For this reason, a defendant is entitled to credit for time served in community corrections on direct sentence if he is later rejected. People v. Washington, 709 P.2d 100 (Colo. App. 1985).

Trial court is without jurisdiction to reimpose a sentence that extends beyond the length of the original sentence. People v. Herrera, 734 P.2d 136 (Colo. App. 1986); Downing v. People, 895 P.2d 1046 (Colo. 1995).

The statutory maximum for a community corrections sentence for purposes of the Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), rule is no different than the statutory maximum for a prison sentence. The firmly established rule from Blakely as applied to Colorado's sentencing scheme in Lopez v. People, 113 P.3d 713 (Colo.), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1017, 126 S. Ct. 654, 163 L. Ed. 2d 529 (2005), also applies to a direct sentence to community corrections in Colorado. People v. Sandoval, , __ P.3d __, aff'd, 2018 CO 21, 413 P.3d 1274 .

District court plainly erred in aggravating defendant's community corrections sentence based on facts that were neither Blakely-compliant nor Blakely-exempt. People v. Sandoval, 2016 COA 19 , __ P.3d __, aff'd, 2018 CO 21, 413 P.3d 1274.

Where the defendant originally received a sentence to three years of probation, which was revoked, followed by a sentence to six years of community corrections, from which the defendant was rejected, the “original sentence” referred to in subsection (1)(e) means the sentence to community corrections. Since this section deals only with resentencing following the failure of community corrections placement, the sentence “originally imposed”, referred to in subsection (1)(e), is the sentence to community corrections, not any prior sentence to probation. Because the defendant received a hearing and representation of counsel when he was resentenced to community corrections, he was not entitled to a further hearing or counsel when the community corrections sentence was revoked and he received a sentence to the department of corrections, which did not exceed the length of the sentence to community corrections. People v. McPherson, 53 P.3d 679 (Colo. App. 2001).

Effect of changing a sentence from concurrent to consecutive because of defendant's escape was not extending the sentence beyond the length originally ordered. Defendant who escaped from community corrections program while serving concurrent sentences, who subsequently completed one sentence but failed to clear the second arrest warrant, was subject to being sentenced to the department of corrections for the length of the original sentence. People v. Taylor, 7 P.3d 1030 (Colo. App. 2000).

Subsection (1)(k) does not apply to awards of presentence confinement credit. By the provision's express terms, only credits earned pursuant to subsection (1)(i) are forfeited. People v. Jim, 2017 COA 123 , 424 P.3d 455.

When the court revokes an offender's sentence to community corrections, subsection (1)(e) read in conjunction with subsection (1)(h) authorizes the sentencing court to increase the offender's sentence, provided that the court holds a hearing. Romero v. People, 179 P.3d 984 (Colo. 2007).

Imposing a sentence increase under subsection (1)(e) does not violate the double jeopardy clauses of the United States and Colorado constitutions because defendant lacked a legitimate expectation of finality in the sentence. Romero v. People, 179 P.3d 984 (Colo. 2007).

Subsection (1)(e) does not condition a district court's authority to set a resentencing hearing on a request from one of the parties. There is no perceived legislative intent to restrict the court's ability to set a resentencing hearing only if the prosecutor or defendant requests it. People v. Reyes, 2016 COA 98 , 409 P.3d 501.

Because subsection (1)(h) authorizes the trial court, following defendant's termination from community corrections, to sentence him or her in the “same manner as if [he or she] had been placed on probation”, the trial court, under such circumstances, is authorized to run a defendant's sentence consecutively to the sentence in the other case. People v. Adams, 128 P.3d 260 (Colo. App. 2005).

Term “offender's sentence” in subsection (1)(e) refers to the length of time the trial court sentences an offender to the department of corrections and does not include any period of mandatory parole that attaches to that sentence by operation of § 18-1-105 (1)(a)(V) . People v. Johnson, 13 P.3d 309 (Colo. 2000).

The mandatory period of parole is not included in calculating the length of a defendant's term of imprisonment to which he is resentenced after termination from community corrections and, therefore, does not exceed the original sentence. People v. Snare, 7 P.3d 1025 (Colo. App. 1999).

Trial court did not violate this section when it imposed the six-year department of corrections sentence, even though that sentence requires an additional mandatory three-year period of parole. People v. McGraw, 30 P.3d 835 (Colo. App. 2001).

Trial court had the authority under former §§ 16-11-204 (4) and 17-27-105 (1)(h) (now §§ 18-1.3-204 (4) and 18-1.3-301 (1)(h) ) to modify defendant's community corrections sentence before it expired. The court retained this authority after defendant's release date passed because re-sentencing proceedings were initiated prior to that date. People v. Knott, 83 P.3d 1147 (Colo. App. 2003).

Because defendant's post-release supervisory period was imposed at a sentence reduction hearing and not at original sentencing, such period is not counted as part of the original sentence for the purpose of resentencing a person pursuant to this section. People v. Carroll, 779 P.2d 1375 (Colo. App. 1989).

The reference to “time credits” in subsection (1)(j) is intended to include both “earned time” and “good time” credits. People v. McCreadie, 938 P.2d 528 (Colo. 1997).

Subsection (1)(j) requires the sentencing court to include the written summary prepared by the administrator of a community corrections program in the mittimus or attach it thereto. People v. Lopez, 961 P.2d 602 (Colo. App. 1998).

If an offender violates a rule or condition of community corrections placement while on nonresidential status, the offender is not entitled upon resentencing to credit for time served while on nonresidential status. People v. Hoecher, 822 P.2d 8 (Colo. 1991) (overruling People v. Herrera, 734 P.2d 136 (Colo. App. 1986)); People v. Galvin, 835 P.2d 603 (Colo. App. 1992); People v. Pimble, 2015 COA 112 , 369 P.3d 729.

The addition of the word “nonresidential” by the legislature to subsection (1)(j) was to ensure that offenders receive earned time and good time credits based on time spent in both residential and nonresidential programs. It was not an attempt by the legislature to mandate that nonresidential time be counted as presentence confinement credit. People v. Pimble, 2015 COA 112 , 369 P.3d 729.

Time served on direct sentence to community corrections is the equivalent of time served in the custody of the department of corrections, therefore once the defendant is sentenced to a state correctional facility, all time served in residential community corrections must be credited to the defendant's sentence. People v. Galvin, 835 P.2d 603 (Colo. App. 1992).

Defendant has no statutory right to a mandatory resentencing hearing after termination from a direct placement at community corrections, as the legislative history supports the conclusion that general assembly intended to prevent duplication of the sentencing hearing. The legislative history also indicates that the term “evidentiary” was added to distinguish judicial hearing from any administrative hearings conducted by community corrections. People v. Abdul, 935 P.2d 4 (Colo. 1997) (decided under law in effect prior to the 1993 repeal and reenactment of this article).

Subsection (1)(d) does not require a court to hold a hearing when converting a community corrections sentence to a department of corrections sentence. People v. Herrera, 2014 COA 20 , 343 P.3d 1012.

Defendant's due process claim was without merit since subsection (1)(g) expressly states that the sentencing court is not required to provide the offender with an evidentiary hearing prior to resentencing and, therefore, there is no right or justifiable expectation created by state law. The defendant could have had no reasonable expectation that he would be transferred only for misbehavior because the statute very clearly gives the community correctional facility discretion to reject the defendant before or after acceptance for any reason. People v. Wilhite, 817 P.2d 1017 (Colo. 1991); People v. Abdul, 935 P.2d 4 (Colo. 1997) (decided under law in effect prior to the 1993 repeal and reenactment of this article).

Direct placement offender who was denied an evidentiary hearing was not treated differently from transitional offenders and thereby denied equal protection of the laws since subsection (1)(g) does not deny such a hearing but makes it discretionary rather than mandatory; and direct placement offenders and transitional offenders are not similarly situated for purposes of equal protection analysis. People v. Wilhite, 817 P.2d 1017 (Colo. 1991).

The denial of a resentencing hearing under subsection (1)(e) has been found to be constitutional under Wilhite, and this section does not violate defendant's right to due process and specifically, his rights to confrontation and to assistance of counsel. People v. James, 940 P.2d 1092 (Colo. App. 1996).

Subsection (2) does not allow for a hearing or other determination as to whether an individual poses a flight risk notwithstanding the existence of a detainer. Rivera-Bottzeck v. Ortiz, 134 P.3d 517 (Colo. App. 2006).

The word “felony” does not modify the word “detainer” in the phrase “felony warrant or detainer” in subsection (2)(b); thus, an inmate with an active immigration and naturalization service detainer cannot be referred for placement in a community corrections program under subsection (2)(b). Rivera-Bottzeck v. Ortiz, 134 P.3d 517 (Colo. App. 2006).

Trial court did not err in summarily resentencing defendant to the custody of the department of corrections since, although the trial court retains its discretion to grant a hearing at the time of resentencing, and such may be the better practice in appropriate cases, the granting of a hearing is not constitutionally required. People v. James, 940 P.2d 1092 (Colo. App. 1996).

Applied in People v. Abila, 670 P.2d 432 (Colo. App. 1983); People v. Patrick, 683 P.2d 801 (Colo. App. 1983); People v. Rodriguez, 55 P.3d 173 (Colo. App. 2002).