If you are accused of internet luring of a child Colorado, the charge is serious, but an accusation is not a conviction. The prosecution still must prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt, and these cases often turn on the exact wording of messages, the context of the communication, the age issue, and what the evidence actually shows.
At Landy Criminal Defense, we understand how overwhelming an internet-based sex offense allegation can feel. These cases can affect your freedom, reputation, career, and future immediately. Still, the government must prove far more than suspicion or disturbing allegations. In many cases, the real issue is whether the communications actually satisfy the statute as written.
Internet luring of a child Colorado generally means knowingly communicating with someone the actor knows or believes is under 15, describing explicit sexual conduct, and in connection with that description persuading or inviting that person to meet. The offense is usually a class 5 felony, but it may become a class 4 felony if the prosecution alleges intent to meet for sexual exploitation or sexual contact.
Jump to:
Under C.R.S. 18-3-306, a person commits this offense if the person knowingly communicates over a computer or computer network, telephone network, data network, or by text or instant message with someone the person knows or believes is under 15 years old. In that communication, or in a later related communication, the person must describe explicit sexual conduct and, in connection with that description, make a statement persuading or inviting the other person to meet.
The law also requires that the accused be more than four years older than the person, or more than four years older than the age the accused believed that person to be. Just as importantly, Colorado law says it is not a defense that no meeting actually happened. Because of that, these cases often focus on digital communications alone.
To convict someone of this charge, the prosecution must prove each required element beyond a reasonable doubt. That burden matters because these cases often depend on message interpretation, online context, and assumptions about intent.
The statute defines “in connection with” broadly. It includes communications that further, advance, promote, or have a continuity of purpose. Those communications may occur before, during, or after the invitation to meet.
It means the prosecution may try to link several messages together and argue they were all part of the same overall purpose. On the other hand, the defense may challenge whether the messages were really connected, whether they were taken out of context, or whether they actually support the government’s theory.
These accusations often start with social media messages, texting, chat platforms, or gaming apps. In some cases, the allegation comes from a real minor. In other cases, it comes from an undercover operation where law enforcement poses as someone underage online.
Because of that, the exact timeline matters. One case may involve a long series of messages the prosecution claims became sexual over time. Another may involve a short exchange that police interpret aggressively. In addition, some cases turn on whether the accused really believed the other person was under 15, while others focus on whether the messages actually invited a meeting in connection with explicit sexual conduct.
This offense is charged as a felony in Colorado. However, the classification depends on what the prosecution alleges and what it can prove about intent.
| Charge Level | When It Applies | Potential Consequences |
|---|---|---|
| Class 5 Felony | Base offense under C.R.S. 18-3-306 | Felony exposure, possible prison, collateral consequences, and a permanent criminal record |
| Class 4 Felony | If committed with intent to meet for sexual exploitation or sexual contact | Greater felony exposure, more serious sentencing risk, and severe long-term consequences |
| Additional Consequences | After a conviction | Possible registration-related issues, treatment demands, restrictions, reputational harm, and professional consequences |
The right defense depends on the facts. In some cases, the defense challenges whether the communications actually satisfy the statute. In others, the focus is on age belief, lack of intent, entrapment concerns, or whether the prosecution is stretching the meaning of the messages too far. Accordingly, a serious defense starts with careful review of the digital evidence and the government’s exact theory.
Internet-based accusations often overlap with other sex offense allegations and related defense issues. Reviewing the entire case, not just the title of the charge, may be critical.
An accusation involving online messages can feel overwhelming, but the government still must prove every element of the offense. These cases often depend on wording, context, age belief, intent, and whether the messages actually fit the statute. Early mistakes, however, can make a difficult case even harder.
At Landy Criminal Defense, we defend serious Colorado sex offense cases by testing the digital evidence, challenging the prosecution’s assumptions, and building strategic defenses around the real facts. Getting experienced counsel involved early may make a major difference in how the case develops.
You do not have to handle this alone. If you are under investigation or already charged, now is the time to protect your rights, preserve important evidence, and avoid avoidable mistakes.
Contact Landy Criminal Defense for a confidential consultation.
It generally means knowingly communicating with someone the actor knows or believes is under 15, describing explicit sexual conduct, and in connection with that description persuading or inviting that person to meet.
No. Colorado law specifically says it is not a defense that a meeting did not occur.
Yes. It is usually a class 5 felony, but it may become a class 4 felony if the prosecution alleges intent to meet for sexual exploitation or sexual contact.
Common defenses may involve lack of intent, lack of proof of age belief, no real invitation to meet, context problems in the messages, and challenges to digital evidence.
*All Fields Are Required
*All fields are required
