This summary identifies access regimes that materially affect Colorado transparency research but are not ordinary CORA or COML analysis. It is grounded in current CRS Title 24, CJD 05-01 as amended effective November 10, 2025, and the captured case cluster.
The Criminal Justice Records Act, sections 24-72-301 to 24-72-305, governs criminal justice records. CORA's public-record definition expressly excludes criminal justice records subject to part 3.
The CJRA declares statewide standards for criminal justice records. Records of official actions must be maintained and open for inspection by any person, while other criminal justice records may be open under part 3 or other law.
"Criminal justice agency" includes courts with criminal jurisdiction and agencies performing functions directly related to detection or investigation of crime, apprehension, pretrial or posttrial release, prosecution, correctional supervision, rehabilitation, evaluation or treatment of accused persons or criminal offenders, criminal identification, or arrest/criminal records information.
"Criminal justice records" are documentary materials made, maintained, or kept by a criminal justice agency for use in functions required or authorized by law or administrative rule.
"Official action" includes arrest, indictment, charging by information, disposition, custody release, mental or physical condition determinations, probation/parole/correctional-program decisions, and formal discipline/reclassification/relocation of persons under criminal sentence.
Harris v. Denver Post is the captured controlling boundary case: seized recordings in a sheriff's investigative custody were criminal justice records subject to CJRA, not ordinary CORA public records.
Records of official actions are open at reasonable times. If a record of official action is unavailable because it is active or in storage, it must be made available within three working days.
Completed peace-officer internal investigation files involving in-uniform or on-duty conduct and alleged misconduct with a member of the public are open after completion, subject to statutory redactions and certain deferrals. Judicial review of withheld completed internal-investigation material uses independent judgment and de novo review.
Other criminal justice records are discretionary unless otherwise provided by law. A denial statement must be provided within seventy-two hours on request and must cite the law/regulation or general public interest protected. A denied applicant may seek an order to show cause. Attorney fees are available only upon arbitrary or capricious denial, and official-action denials can produce a daily penalty.
Court-record access is governed by Chief Justice Directive 05-01 and the attached Public Access to Court Records policy, not ordinary CORA analysis. The captured policy states that every member of the public has access to court records as provided in the policy, defines "public" broadly, and sets a separate framework for court records, remote access, bulk distribution, aggregate/compiled data, excluded records, timeliness, fees, vendor obligations, public education, and correction of inaccurate information.
The captured CJD 05-01 policy is effective November 10, 2025. Future agents should re-check the Colorado Judicial Branch site for amendments before relying on the captured version in time-sensitive work.
Executive-session recordings are governed by both COML and CORA section 24-72-204(5.5). They are not ordinary public records available on request. A requester must apply to district court and show grounds sufficient to support a reasonable belief that the public body substantially discussed unauthorized matters or took formal action in executive session. If that threshold is met, the court conducts in camera review. Only the portions reflecting unauthorized substantial discussion or formal action become public.
Gumina and Guy add an important boundary: if the executive session was not properly convened, the session may be treated as an open meeting and its records may be open without the ordinary section 24-72-204(5.5) in camera threshold.
Sentinel adds that attorney-client privilege is not waived merely by public disclosure of unprivileged facts or the subject of discussion; waiver requires disclosure of the privileged communications themselves.
Several current CORA provisions require agents to check specialized regimes before assuming ordinary access. Examples include:
Future agents should ask: