5.3 Mandatory Duty to Intervene and Report Excessive Force (C.R.S. 18-8-802)

Mandatory Duty to Intervene and Report Excessive Force (C.R.S. 18-8-802)

One of the most consequential obligations created by Senate Bill 20-217 is the affirmative duty of every Colorado peace officer to intervene in and report another officer's excessive force. It is essential to cite it correctly, because prep materials frequently get this wrong.

Citation warning. The duty to intervene and the duty to report are codified at C.R.S. § 18-8-802, inside Article 8, Part 8 of the Criminal Code — Offenses Relating to Use of Force by Peace Officers. They are not found in C.R.S. § 18-1-707(4.5). Section 18-1-707(4.5) is an entirely different provision: it states that, notwithstanding anything else in that section, a peace officer is justified in using deadly force when the officer has an objectively reasonable belief that a lesser degree of force is inadequate and objectively reasonable grounds to believe that the officer or another person is in imminent danger of being killed or of receiving serious bodily injury.

---

1. The Statutory Architecture of Article 8, Part 8

The substantive force standards — non-deadly force, deadly force, the chokehold ban, the verbal warning requirement, the duty to render aid — remain in C.R.S. 18-1-707. Article 8, Part 8 is where the bystander officer's obligations and the criminal penalties live.

---

2. Two Separate Duties, Two Separate Offenses

+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  DUTY TO REPORT  —  C.R.S. 18-8-802(1)                                    |
|  An officer who WITNESSES another officer (or a law enforcement animal's   |
|  handler) use physical force exceeding what 18-1-707 permits, during an    |
|  arrest, detention, custody, booking, or crowd or riot control, MUST       |
|  report that use of force to the officer's IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR.          |
|    * Report must be IN WRITING WITHIN TEN DAYS of the occurrence          |
|    * Minimum contents: date, time, place; identity (if known) and         |
|      description of the participants; description of the events and the   |
|      force used                                                           |
|    * Must be INCLUDED WITH ALL OTHER REPORTS of the incident              |
|    * FAILURE TO REPORT = CLASS 2 MISDEMEANOR  (18-8-802(1)(c))            |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  DUTY TO INTERVENE  —  C.R.S. 18-8-802(1.5)                               |
|  An ON-DUTY peace officer SHALL INTERVENE to prevent or stop another      |
|  peace officer from using physical force that exceeds the degree of       |
|  force permitted, if any, by 18-1-707 -- during an arrest, detention,     |
|  custody, booking, or crowd or riot control --                            |
|  **WITHOUT REGARD FOR CHAIN OF COMMAND.**                                 |
|    * The intervening officer must REPORT THE INTERVENTION to his or her   |
|      immediate supervisor, in writing, within ten days                    |
|    * FAILURE TO INTERVENE = CLASS 1 MISDEMEANOR  (18-8-802(1.5)(d))       |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

The two duties are independent. An officer who intervenes but never files the written report has still committed the reporting offense. An officer who reports but stood by while the force continued has still committed the intervention offense — and it is the more serious of the two.

Note the class asymmetry, which is a favorite examination point:

---

3. Scope: Rank, Agency, and Setting

Chain of command is irrelevant. The statute says so in terms: the on-duty officer shall intervene "without regard for chain of command." A probationary officer's duty to intervene against a field training officer, a sergeant, or a chief is identical to the duty to intervene against a peer. "I was following orders" is not a defense; it is an admission.

Crowd and riot control are expressly named. The statutory language reaches force used "in the process of crowd control or riot control." An officer standing in a line at a protest is not exempt from the intervention duty.

Law enforcement animals are covered. The duty extends to a handler who allows a law enforcement animal to use force exceeding what 18-1-707 permits.

---

4. Anti-Retaliation — C.R.S. 18-8-802(1.5)(c)

Colorado protects the officer who does the right thing. Subsection (1.5)(c) provides that a member of a law enforcement agency shall not discipline or retaliate in any way against a peace officer for:

1. Intervening as required by the statute;
2. Reporting unconstitutional conduct; or
3. Failing to follow what the officer reasonably believes is an unconstitutional directive.

The third clause is the one recruits should memorize. Colorado law affirmatively protects an officer who refuses an order the officer reasonably believes is unconstitutional — even if the officer turns out to be mistaken, so long as the belief was reasonable.

---

5. What Happens After the Report

Under C.R.S. 18-8-802(1.5), the findings of an agency's internal investigation into an alleged failure to intervene or use of excessive force must be presented to the district attorney for consideration of criminal charges. Where the district attorney charges the officer who used excessive force but does not charge other officers who were present, the statute requires a written report explaining the basis for that decision.

Criminal exposure is only one consequence. A conviction under C.R.S. 18-8-802 is a misdemeanor in article 8 of title 18, which places it within the list of convictions in C.R.S. 24-31-305(1.5) that require the POST board to suspend or revoke peace officer certification under C.R.S. 24-31-305(2). Separately, the officer faces personal civil exposure under C.R.S. 13-21-131, where qualified immunity is not a defense.

Materially false reports. C.R.S. 18-8-802(2) makes clear that an officer who makes a materially false statement in a report required by the section is subject to Colorado's false reporting statutes — and in Colorado a knowing false statement of material fact in an official record also triggers mandatory POST revocation for untruthfulness under C.R.S. 24-31-305(2.5).

---

6. The Ketamine Parallel — C.R.S. 18-8-805

Section 18-8-805 creates a structurally identical duty for a different subject matter. A peace officer may not use, direct, or unduly influence the administration of ketamine upon another person, and the section imposes a corresponding duty to report and duty to intervene when another officer does. The substantive prohibition sits in C.R.S. 18-1-707(1.5), with a narrow exception for a peace officer who is also a certified emergency medical service provider administering ketamine consistent with C.R.S. 25-3.5-209 and based on that provider's own training and expertise.

---

7. What Intervention Actually Requires

The statute says "intervene to prevent or stop," and it does not prescribe a method. In practice that means an escalating response scaled to what will actually stop the force:

1. Verbal. Direct, unambiguous, by name: "Rodriguez — stop. He's cuffed." Vague discomfort is not intervention.
2. Physical. Where verbal direction fails or injury is imminent — stepping between, physically redirecting, or restraining the officer.
3. Command notification. Immediately, by radio or phone.
4. Medical aid. C.R.S. 18-1-707(2)(c) requires that assistance and medical aid be ensured as soon as practicable.
5. Documentation. The written report, to the immediate supervisor, within ten days, containing the date, time and place; the identity and description of the participants; and a description of the events, the force used, and the intervention taken — filed with all other reports of the incident.
6. Body-worn camera. Under C.R.S. 24-31-902 the encounter is recorded, and the recording is the corroboration for both the intervention and the report.