Bindinglaw

CO · jury_instructions

COLJI-Crim. H:57.5

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS—UNREASONABLE OR EXCESSIVE FORCE

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

The evidence presented in this case has raised the affirmative defense

of “unreasonable or excessive force” as a defense to [aggravated cruelty to

animals] [cruelty to a law enforcement animal].

The defendant’s conduct was legally authorized if:

1. [he] [she] used physical force upon a law enforcement animal to

defend [his] [her] own person or a third person, and

2. [he] [she] reasonably believed that a law enforcement animal

was an application of unreasonable or excessive force, in

violation of the law.

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, at least one of the above numbered conditions.

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 [aggravated cruelty to animals] [cruelty to a law

enforcement animal]. In that event, you must return a verdict of not guilty

of [aggravated cruelty to animals] [cruelty to a law enforcement animal].

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 [aggravated cruelty to animals] [cruelty to

a law enforcement animal] 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
ef42077368e84fe162bcd68c1c82a3d4d2361057495573d2dea8fe2d2d609366
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.