Bindinglaw

CO · jury_instructions

COLJI-Crim. H:56

LOITERING—LAWFUL ASSEMBLY

activein force · 2026-02-25 – presentcompiled-edition

The evidence presented in this case has raised the affirmative defense

of “lawful assembly,” as a defense to loitering.

The defendant’s conduct was legally authorized if:

1. he [she] was exercising his [her] right to lawful assembly and

peaceful and orderly petition for the redress of grievances. [,

either in the course of a labor dispute or otherwise.]

The prosecution has the burden to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt,

that the defendant’s conduct was not legally authorized by this defense. In

order to meet this burden of proof, the prosecution must disprove, beyond

a reasonable doubt, the above numbered condition.

After considering all the evidence, if you decide the prosecution has

failed to meet this burden of proof, then the prosecution has failed to prove

the defendant’s conduct was not legally authorized by this defense, which

is an essential element of loitering. In that event, you must return a verdict

of not guilty of loitering.

After considering all the evidence, if you decide the prosecution has

met this burden of proof, then the prosecution has proved the defendant’s

conduct was not legally authorized by this defense. In that event, your

verdict concerning the charge of loitering must depend upon your

determination whether the prosecution has met its burden of proof with

respect to the remaining elements of that offense.

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
7727102726943998abc41123f6585e5baeeeb9b3b0ef8b38465f61500bd05575
View the official source →

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.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.