2021 Colorado Code
Title 18 - Criminal Code
Article 1 - Provisions Applicable to Offenses Generally
Part 8 - Responsibility
§ 18-1-801. Insufficient Age

The responsibility of a person for his conduct is the same for persons between the ages of ten and eighteen as it is for persons over eighteen except to the extent that responsibility is modified by the provisions of the “Colorado Children's Code”, title 19, C.R.S. No child under ten years of age shall be found guilty of any offense.

History. Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 412, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 40-1-901 .

Law reviews. For article, “Mens Rea and the Colorado Criminal Code”, see 52 U. Colo. L. Rev. 167 (1981). For comment, “Arrested Development: An Alternative to Juveniles Serving LIFE Without Parole in Colorado”, see 78 U. Colo. L. Rev. 1059 (2007).

Annotator's note. Since § 18-1-801 is similar to former § 40-1-4 , C.R.S. 1963, and laws antecedent thereto, relevant cases construing those provisions have been included in the annotations to this section.

An infant is presumed incapable of committing crime because he is presumed not to possess criminal intent. Calkins v. Albi, 163 Colo. 370 , 431 P.2d 17 (1967).

An infant under the age of 10 years shall not be found guilty of any offense. Gallegos v. Tinsley, 139 Colo. 157 , 337 P.2d 386 (1959); LeCoq ex rel. LeCoq v. Klemme, 28 Colo. App. 590, 476 P.2d 280 (1970).

Although a child under the age of 10 cannot be charged with an offense, it does not necessarily follow that the child cannot violate the law. In enacting the statute, the general assembly determined those persons who could be held responsible for their criminal acts, not that such persons could not commit the acts. People v. Miller, 830 P.2d 1092, (Colo. App. 1991).

Minor who is over 14 years of age is accountable for crimes committed by him. Gallegos v. Tinsley, 139 Colo. 157 , 337 P.2d 386 (1959).

Though the children's code may not in so many words raise the age below which there can be no criminal responsibility as concerns a felony from 10 to 14 years, in effect, that is exactly what it did. People ex rel. Terrell v. District Court, 164 Colo. 437 , 435 P.2d 763 (1967).

Incapacity is a defense. The incapacity of a party, by reason of his tender years, to commit the crime charged may be a good defense on the trial, as it may effectually negative the charge. Mitchell v. People, 24 Colo. 532 , 52 P. 671 (1898).

Capacity is not required to be stated in the indictment, and its omission furnishes no ground for arresting the judgment after a verdict against the accused. Mitchell v. People, 24 Colo. 532 , 52 P. 671 (1898).

This section is not relevant to a determination of liability for the commission of an intentional tort. LeCoq ex rel. LeCoq v. Klemme, 28 Colo. App. 590, 476 P.2d 280 (1970).

Applied in People v. Gallegos, 628 P.2d 999 (Colo. 1981).