Colorado Protection Order Violation Lawyer

A single text message, a reply to a shared co-parenting app, or showing up at a child’s school event can all lead to a protection order violation charge in Colorado — even when there was no threat, no argument, and no intent to cause harm. Courts and prosecutors treat these violations seriously, and they often carry consequences separate from, and in addition to, whatever case led to the order in the first place.

At Mile High Legal, our attorneys defend clients across Denver and throughout Colorado who are accused of violating a protection order, including in situations involving miscommunication, mutual contact initiated by the protected party, or orders that were unclear about what conduct was actually prohibited.

What Counts as a Protection Order Violation

Violation of a protection order, codified at C.R.S. § 18-6-803.5, occurs when a person violates the terms of a civil or criminal protection order issued against them, such as by contacting the protected person directly or indirectly, coming within a prohibited distance, or possessing a firearm when the order prohibits it. The violation does not need to involve any new act of violence to be charged.

A first violation of a protection order is a class 2 misdemeanor under C.R.S. § 18-6-803.5(2)(a). It is enhanced to a class 1 misdemeanor if the restrained person has a prior conviction for violating a protection order (or an analogous municipal ordinance), if the order was a mandatory protection order issued under C.R.S. § 18-1-1001 (the kind automatically entered in a criminal case), if the underlying case involved an allegation of stalking, or if the parties were in an intimate relationship. The violation charge itself is always a misdemeanor — but if the restrained person’s conduct also amounts to a separate crime, such as assault, menacing, or burglary, those charges can be filed as felonies alongside the protection order violation.

Important Points From Colorado Model Jury Instructions and Case Law

• The protected person’s consent is not a defense. Colorado courts have held that a civil protection order is an order of the court, not of the protected person, so the protected person’s consent to contact cannot, as a matter of law, excuse the restrained person’s violation of the order. Hotsenpiller v. Morris, 2017 COA 95, 488 P.3d 219. This is one of the most common misunderstandings clients have about this charge — being invited to make contact does not make the contact legal.
• “Knowingly” applies to every element of the offense. The prosecution must prove the restrained person knowingly violated the order — not merely that they knew the order existed, but that they knowingly engaged in the prohibited conduct as well. People v. Coleby, 34 P.3d 422 (Colo. 2001).

Common Defenses to Protection Order Violations

• Lack of knowledge — the defendant was not properly served or was unaware of the order’s specific terms.
• Protected party initiated contact — while this is not always a complete defense, it is relevant context courts and prosecutors consider.
• Ambiguous order terms — disputing that the conduct at issue actually falls within what the order prohibits.
• Mistaken identity or incidental contact — such as an accidental encounter in a small town or shared community space.

Why Choose Mile High Legal

These charges often carry consequences beyond the courtroom — custody disputes, firearm rights, and employment can all be affected. We work to resolve these cases carefully, with an eye on the bigger picture of what a client has at stake.