Colorado’s harassment statute covers several different theories. Some allegations involve physical contact, some involve following a person in public, and others involve repeated calls, repeated electronic messages, coarse communications, or threats sent through phones, texts, computers, or other interactive electronic media.
The statute also states that it does not intend to infringe on rights protected by the First Amendment or prevent the expression of religious, political, or philosophical views. That limitation can matter in some Colorado harassment cases.
| Subsection | Basic Theory | What Prosecutors Generally Allege |
|---|---|---|
| 18-9-111(1)(a) | Physical contact harassment | The accused, with intent to harass, annoy, or alarm, struck, shoved, kicked, otherwise touched, or subjected another person to physical contact. |
| 18-9-111(1)(b) | Obscene language or gesture in public | In a public place, the accused directed obscene language or made an obscene gesture at another person. |
| 18-9-111(1)(c) | Following in public | The accused followed a person in or about a public place with the required intent. |
| 18-9-111(1)(e) | Electronic or phone harassment / threats | The accused directly or indirectly initiated communication or directed language by phone, text, computer, network, or other interactive electronic medium in a manner intended to harass or threaten bodily injury or property damage, or made an obscene comment, request, suggestion, or proposal through those means. |
| 18-9-111(1)(f) | Repeated phone ringing | The accused made a telephone call or caused a phone to ring repeatedly with no purpose of legitimate conversation. |
| 18-9-111(1)(g) | Repeated communications at inconvenient hours | The accused made repeated communications at inconvenient hours that invaded another person’s privacy and interfered with the use and enjoyment of a home, residence, or other private property. |
| 18-9-111(1)(h) | Repeated insults or coarse communications | The accused repeatedly insulted, taunted, challenged, or used offensively coarse language in a manner likely to provoke a violent or disorderly response. |
| 18-9-111(1)(i) | Transit-worker interference | The accused wrongfully interfered with a transit worker performing a lawful duty. |
To convict someone of harassment in Colorado, prosecutors must prove the specific subsection charged beyond a reasonable doubt. Even so, most cases still involve several common issues.
| Element | What It Means |
|---|---|
| Identity | The state must prove the accused was the person who made the communication or engaged in the conduct. |
| Intent | The prosecution must prove the accused acted with intent to harass, annoy, or alarm another person. |
| Prohibited act | The prosecution must prove the accused engaged in the conduct described in the charged subsection, such as physical contact, following, repeated calls, or electronic communications. |
| Context | Some subsections require a public place, repeated conduct, inconvenient hours, or communication likely to provoke a violent or disorderly response. |
In many Colorado harassment cases, the key dispute is not whether a message was sent or words were spoken. The real issue is often whether prosecutors can prove the required intent and whether the communication actually fits the charged subsection.
Subsection 18-9-111(1)(e) addresses harassment through telephones, texts, computers, data networks, instant messages, and other interactive electronic media. The statute says this subsection may be cited as Kiana Arellano’s Law.
These allegations often involve text messages, social media messages, email, or other electronic communication. Colorado law also says the act may be deemed to have occurred where the communication was made or where it was received. That venue rule can matter in a Colorado electronic harassment case.
For purposes of C.R.S. § 18-9-111, the statute defines “obscene” in a specific way. It refers to a patently offensive description of ultimate sexual acts or a solicitation to commit ultimate sexual acts, whether actual or simulated, including acts such as masturbation, cunnilingus, fellatio, anilingus, or excretory functions.
That definition matters because not every rude, offensive, or vulgar message automatically qualifies as obscene under the statute.
The charge level for harassment in Colorado depends on which subsection prosecutors use. The statute divides the offense into multiple penalty levels.
| Subsection Type | Charge Level | General Description |
|---|---|---|
| 18-9-111(1)(a), (1)(c), (1)(i), or bias-motivated harassment under subsection (2)(a) | Class 1 misdemeanor – up to 354 days in jail and/or probation. | Physical contact harassment, following in public, transit-worker interference, or conduct motivated in whole or part by certain protected characteristics. |
| 18-9-111(1)(e), (1)(f), (1)(g), or (1)(h) | Class 2 misdemeanor – up tp 120 days in jail and/0r probation. | Electronic harassment, repeated ringing, repeated privacy-invading communications, or repeated coarse language likely to provoke a violent or disorderly response. |
| 18-9-111(1)(b) | Petty offense – up to 180 days in jail and/or probation. | Obscene language or obscene gesture in a public place. |
A harassment conviction may also bring collateral consequences, including protection orders, probation conditions, no-contact restrictions, employment problems, and a permanent criminal record.
Many harassment charges in Colorado arise in domestic disputes. If the accused and the alleged victim were involved in an intimate relationship, prosecutors may add a domestic violence designation under C.R.S. § 18-6-800.3.
That additional designation can change how the case proceeds. It may trigger mandatory protection orders, treatment requirements, firearm restrictions, and no-contact conditions even when the underlying charge is only a misdemeanor.
Police and prosecutors file Colorado harassment charges in many different situations, including:
The specific facts matter. A harassment case often turns on the wording of the messages, the number of communications, the surrounding context, and the intent prosecutors attribute to the accused.
Every case depends on its facts, but several defenses may apply in a harassment Colorado prosecution.
In some cases, the defense focuses on whether the communication had a legitimate purpose. In others, the defense challenges whether prosecutors can prove the required intent or whether the alleged conduct falls within constitutionally protected speech.
Usually yes. Depending on the subsection, harassment may be charged as a class 1 misdemeanor, class 2 misdemeanor, or petty offense.
Kiana Arellano’s Law refers to subsection 18-9-111(1)(e), which addresses certain harassing or threatening communications made through phones, texts, computers, or other interactive electronic media.
Yes. Text messages, instant messages, emails, and other electronic communications may support a harassment charge under subsection (1)(e).
No. Some subsections involve physical contact, but many others involve phone calls, repeated communications, following, obscene gestures, or electronic messages.
Yes. If the accused and alleged victim were in an intimate relationship, prosecutors may add a domestic violence designation.
If you are facing a harassment charge in Colorado, early legal advice can make a major difference. A defense lawyer can analyze the exact subsection charged, review the communications or witness statements, and identify defenses that may reduce or defeat the allegation.
Landy Criminal Defense represents people facing harassment, assault, menacing, domestic violence, and other serious criminal allegations throughout Colorado.
Contact Landy Criminal Defense to discuss your case.
*All Fields Are Required
*All fields are required
