CO · jury_instructions
COLJI-Crim. 42:01.8
TAMPERING WITH AN APPROVED IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE (RESTRICTED)
The elements of the crime of tampering with an approved ignition
interlock device (restricted) are:
1. That the defendant,
2. in the State of Colorado, at or about the date and place charged,
3. was a person whose privilege to drive was restricted to the
operation of a motor vehicle equipped with an approved
ignition interlock device, and
4. drove a motor vehicle in which an approved ignition interlock
device was installed, and
5. knew that any person had intercepted, bypassed, or interfered
with the approved ignition interlock device.
[6. and that the defendant’s conduct was not legally authorized by
the affirmative defense[s] in Instruction[s] ___.]
After considering all the evidence, if you decide the prosecution has
proven each of the elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find
the defendant guilty of tampering with an approved ignition interlock
device (restricted).
After considering all the evidence, if you decide the prosecution has
failed to prove any one or more of the elements beyond a reasonable doubt,
you should find the defendant not guilty of tampering with an approved
ignition interlock device (restricted).
History
COLJI-Crim. (2025), Colorado Supreme Court Model Criminal Jury Instructions Committee. The committee's page: "The 2025 edition was published online on February 25, 2026." © 2025 Supreme Court of Colorado for the State of Colorado.
Provenance
- Source
- www.coloradojudicial.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-24
- Edition
- crim-2026-02-25
- Content hash
70654c214307b081c7def67457d21b203751bf7a31b95fb399dfed811af0d2c4
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.