CO · rules
C.R.C.P. 208.1
Character and Fitness Investigation
(1) Purpose. The purpose of a character and fitness investigation conducted before an
individual is admitted to practice law in Colorado is to protect the public and safeguard the
system of justice.
(2) Burden of Proof. The applicant shall bear the burden of proving the character and
fitness necessary to practice law in Colorado.
(3) Expectations of A Lawyer’s Responsibilities. Applicants should understand that a
lawyer’s professional responsibilities include the following minimum expectations set
forth in the Preamble to the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct:
(a) A lawyer, as a member of the legal profession, is a representative of clients, an
officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality
of justice;
(b) A lawyer should be competent, prompt and diligent in all professional functions;
(c) A lawyer should maintain communication with a client concerning the
representation;
(d) A lawyer should keep in confidence information relating to the representation of a
client except when disclosure is required or permitted by the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct or other law;
(e) A lawyer’s conduct should conform to the requirements of the law, both in
professional services to clients and in the lawyer’s business and personal affairs;
(f) A lawyer should use the law’s procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to
harass or intimidate others;
(g) A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal system and for those who serve
it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials; and
(h) While it is a lawyer’s duty, when necessary, to challenge the rectitude of official
action, it is also the lawyer’s duty to uphold the legal process.
(4) Standard of Character and Fitness. A Colorado lawyer should possess record of
conduct that justifies the trust of clients, adversaries, courts and others with respect to the
professional responsibilities owed to them. A basis for denial of an application arising from
lack of character may exist when the applicant’s record tends to show a deficiency in
honesty, integrity, judgment, trustworthiness, diligence, reliability or capacity to practice
law. A basis for denial of an application may exist where the applicant’s record reveals a
history of deceptiveness, criminality, fraud, negligence, irrational behavior, drug or alcohol
dependence or abuse, emotional or mental instability, financial irresponsibility or violence.
(5) Essential Eligibility Requirements. Applicants must meet all of the following
essential eligibility requirements for the practice of law:
(a) Honesty and candor with clients, lawyers, courts, regulatory authorities and others;
(b) The ability to reason logically, recall complex factual information, and accurately
analyze legal problems;
(c) The ability to use a high degree of organization and clarity in communicating with
clients, lawyers, judicial officers, and others;
(d) The ability to use good judgment on behalf of clients and in conducting one’s
professional business;
(e) The ability to conduct oneself with respect for and in accordance with the law;
(f) The ability to exhibit regard for the rights and welfare of others;
(g) The ability to comply with the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct; state,
local, and federal laws, regulations, statutes, and rules; and orders of a court or tribunal;
(h) The ability to act diligently and reliably in fulfilling obligations to clients, lawyers,
courts, and others;
(i) The ability to be honest and use good judgment in financial dealings on behalf of
oneself, clients, and others; and
(j) The ability to comply with deadlines and time constraints.
(6) Relevant Conduct. The following shall be treated as cause for scrutiny of whether
the applicant possesses the character and fitness necessary to practice law in Colorado:
(a) Unlawful conduct;
(b) Academic misconduct;
(c) Misconduct in employment;
(d) Acts involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation;
(e) Acts that demonstrate disregard for the rights or welfare of others;
(f) Abuse of legal process, including the filing of vexatious or frivolous lawsuits or the
raising of vexatious or frivolous defenses;
(g) Neglect of financial responsibilities;
(h) Neglect of professional obligations;
(i) Violation of a court order, including a child support order;
(j) Conduct evidencing current mental or emotional instability that may interfere with
the ability to practice law;
(k) Conduct evidencing current drug or alcohol dependence or abuse that may interfere
with the ability to practice law;
(l) Denial of admission to the bar in another jurisdiction on character and fitness
grounds;
(m) Disciplinary action by a lawyer disciplinary agency or other professional disciplinary agency of any jurisdiction;
(n) Making false statements, including material omissions, on law school admission
applications; or
(o) Making false statements, including material omissions, on bar applications in this
state or any other jurisdiction.
The above is not an exhaustive list, but is instead illustrative of common causes for
scrutiny of whether an applicant possesses the character and fitness necessary to practice
law in Colorado.
(7) Considerations. The Character and Fitness Committee shall determine whether the
applicant possesses the character and fitness necessary to practice law in Colorado. The
factors the Committee may consider in assigning weight and significance to the applicant’s
prior conduct include, but are not limited to:
(a) The applicant’s age at the time of the conduct;
(b) The recency of the conduct;
(c) The reliability of the information concerning the conduct;
(d) The seriousness of the conduct;
(e) The underlying circumstances of the conduct;
(f) The cumulative effect of the conduct, including its impact on others;
(g) Evidence of rehabilitation documented pursuant to subsection (8);
(h) Any positive social contributions the applicant has made after the conduct occurred;
(i) The applicant’s candor in the admissions process;
(j) The materiality of any omissions or misrepresentations; and
(k) Evidence of mental or emotional instability.
(8) Rehabilitation. An applicant who affirmatively asserts rehabilitation from past
conduct may provide evidence of rehabilitation by submitting one or more of the following:
(a) Evidence that the applicant has acknowledged the conduct was wrong and has
accepted responsibility for the conduct;
(b) Evidence of strict compliance with the conditions of any disciplinary, judicial,
administrative, or other order, where applicable;
(c) Evidence of lack of malice toward those whose duty compelled bringing disciplinary, judicial, administrative, or other proceedings against the applicant;
(d) Evidence of cooperation with the Office of Attorney Admissions investigation;
(e) Evidence that the applicant intends to conform future conduct to the standards of
character and fitness necessary to practice law in Colorado;
(f) Evidence of restitution of funds or property, where applicable;
(g) Evidence of positive social contributions through employment, community service,
or civic service;
(h) Evidence that the applicant is not currently engaging in misconduct;
(i) Evidence of a record of recent conduct that demonstrates that the applicant meets
the essential eligibility requirements for the practice of law in Colorado and justifies the
trust of clients, adversaries, courts and the public;
(j) Evidence that the applicant has changed in ways that will reduce the likelihood of
future misconduct; or
(k) Other evidence that supports an assertion of rehabilitation, including medical or
psychological testimony or opinion.
History
Source: Entire rule added and effective September 1, 2014. ANNOTATION Law reviews. For article, ‘‘The Colorado Character Investigation of Applicants to the Bar’’, see 28 Dicta 333 (1951). Reinstatement after suspension from prac- tice may be conditioned upon undergoing a psychiatric evaluation. People v. Fagan, 745 P.2d 249 (Colo. 1987). Applied in People ex rel. Buckley v. Beck, 199 Colo. 482, 610 P.2d 1069 (1980) (decided under former C.R.C.P. 209); People v. Roehl, 655 P.2d 1381 (Colo. 1983) (decided under for- mer rule).
Provenance
- Source
- content.leg.colorado.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-15
- Content hash
ac735e596e58b4aac7e03574f1477acde1d04a52cf53791c5573296b261df651
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.