Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Current as of January 01, 2022 | Updated by FindLaw Staff
(1) The provisions of this section are nonexclusive and in no way limit the effect or applicability of section 18-15-102.
(2) In any prosecution under section 18-15-102, if it is shown that the factors enumerated in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this subsection (2) were present in connection with the making of the extension of credit in question, there shall arise a presumption that the extension of credit was extortionate:
(a) The extension of credit was made with a loan finance charge in excess of that established for criminal usury.
(b) At the time credit was extended, the debtor reasonably believed that one or more extensions of credit by the creditor had been collected or attempted to be collected by extortionate means or the nonrepayment thereof had been punished by extortionate means.
(c) Upon the making of the extension of credit, the total of the extensions of credit by the creditor to the debtor then outstanding, including any unpaid interest or similar charges, exceeded one hundred dollars.
(3) In any prosecution under section 18-15-102, evidence of similar offenses tending to establish the existence of a plan, scheme, or design on the part of the defendant to produce a result of which the act charged is a part shall be admissible in evidence against the defendant. Such evidence of similar offenses, if known to the debtor, shall also be admissible in evidence for the purpose of establishing the reasonable belief of the debtor referred to in paragraph (b) of subsection (2) of this section.
(4) Whether evidence introduced under the provisions of subsection (2) of this section giving rise to the presumption that the extension of credit was extortionate is sufficient to establish the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, if such evidence is not disputed, is a question to be determined by the jury under proper instructions or by the court if no jury trial is had. Where there is evidence tending to show the innocence of the transaction, the issue of whether the extension of credit was extortionate shall be submitted to the jury, if trial is to a jury, unless the court is satisfied that the evidence as a whole clearly negates the presumed offense.
Cite this article: FindLaw.com - Colorado Revised Statutes Title 18. Criminal Code § 18-15-103. Presumption that extension of credit is extortionate - last updated January 01, 2022 | https://codes.findlaw.com/co/title-18-criminal-code/co-rev-st-sect-18-15-103/
FindLaw Codes may not reflect the most recent version of the law in your jurisdiction. Please verify the status of the code you are researching with the state legislature or via Westlaw before relying on it for your legal needs.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes, visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)