Domestic violence and divorce in Colorado: safety first, then the record.

Safety first: who to call, and when.

A lawyer is not the first call. If you are in danger, call 911. The organizations below are confidential, and most services are free. Each number was checked on the organization’s own site in September 2026; confirm before you rely on one.

Where to call.

Safety planning, and the court case.

A safety plan is personal, and the people who build them every day are advocates: the national hotline’s, and those at SafeHouse Denver and Three Birds Alliance, each of which publishes safety-planning guidance. What follows is only the part that touches a court case.

Measuring danger. The Danger Assessment, developed by Jacquelyn Campbell, “helps to determine the level of danger an abused woman has of being killed by her intimate partner”; it is free, and its scoring requires its authors’ training (dangerassessment.org). Colorado police will run their own lethality assessment from July 1, 2027 (C.R.S. § 18-6-807).

This page, and your devices. History, shared accounts and location sharing can reveal a visit here. The quick-exit button replaces this page with a search page but does not erase history; if a device may be monitored, use another.

Civil protection orders: the 2025 standard, the fourteen-day hearing.

The fastest order a Colorado court issues. The full procedure, for both sides, is on Protection Orders; this is what matters in a divorce.

The temporary order.

Since January 1, 2025 a temporary order issues on a risk or threat of physical harm, or a threat of psychological or emotional harm. Imminent danger is no longer the test.

A temporary civil protection order “may be issued if the issuing judge or magistrate finds that a risk or threat of physical harm or the threat of psychological or emotional harm exists to the person or persons seeking protection,” and the court “shall consider all relevant evidence concerning the safety and protection of the persons seeking the protection order, regardless of when an incident occurred” (C.R.S. § 13-14-104.5(7)(a)). The Court of Appeals confirmed in In re Marriage of Wiggs, 2025 COA 10, that the old “imminent danger” finding was replaced. The statute’s purpose clause names “financial control, document control, property control” as abuse (C.R.S. § 13-14-100.2(2)).

Where and how. No police report is required. The case is filed where an act occurred or either party lives or works, or inside the divorce on a motion with an affidavit (C.R.S. § 13-14-104.5(5)), and it is heard at the earliest possible time, often without the other side. There is no filing or service fee in a case of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking (C.R.S. § 13-14-109). Denver County Court takes filings in person at the City and County Building, weekdays from 7:30 to 9:00 a.m. After hours, police can reach an on-call judge for an emergency order that lasts until the close of the next court day (C.R.S. § 13-14-103).

What it can order. No contact; exclusion from the home “upon a showing that physical or emotional harm would otherwise result”; continued payment of the mortgage, rent, insurance and utilities for up to a year; and temporary care of the children for up to a year, with parenting time supervised or, if safety cannot be ensured, denied (C.R.S. § 13-14-105).

From the temporary order to the permanent one.

The criminal case: mandatory arrest, a mandatory order.

The criminal case belongs to the district attorney, not to either spouse, and it runs on its own schedule. What it does in the first days shapes the divorce.

For criminal purposes, domestic violence is “an act or threatened act of violence upon a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an intimate relationship,” plus any other crime against a person or property, including an animal, “when used as a method of coercion, control, punishment, intimidation, or revenge.” Spouses, former spouses, past or present couples and co-parents are all in an intimate relationship (C.R.S. § 18-6-800.3).

How it reaches the divorce. A criminal no-contact order can make a parenting exchange or a message about the children a crime, and only the criminal court can change it. A statement given in the divorce while a criminal case is pending can be used in the criminal case, so the two are coordinated with criminal counsel. A conviction brings mandatory evaluation and treatment (C.R.S. § 18-6-801) and a federal firearms bar.

Custody after a finding: the rules that took effect May 27, 2026.

HB 26-1309 rewrote what a Colorado court must do when domestic violence is raised in a parenting case. The old rule in section 14-10-124(4) is repealed; a description of it is out of date.

“‘Domestic violence’ means one of the following committed by a party, whether or not the conduct constitutes a criminal offense: (A) An act or threatened act of physical assault or bodily harm against the other parent or a family or household member, including a child; (B) An act or threatened act of damage to property belonging to the other parent or a family or household member, including a child; (C) An act or threatened act of physical assault or bodily harm against an animal belonging to the other parent or a family or household member, including a child; (D) Stalking; (E) Sexual assault; (F) Coercive control; (G) Economic abuse; or (H) Human trafficking.”

C.R.S. § 14-10-103(1.5)(b)(I)

Protective conduct is excluded. Coercive control is “a pattern of threatening, humiliating, or intimidating actions … that is used to harm, punish, or frighten an individual”; economic abuse includes controlling access to money or credit, preventing school or work, and “forcing default on joint or other financial obligations.”

The finding, and what it triggers.

The court must decide, on the record and by a preponderance of the evidence, whether domestic violence occurred. A finding limits joint decision-making and requires safety conditions.

When a party, a child and family investigator, an evaluator or the child’s legal representative presents evidence of domestic violence, child abuse or neglect, or a sexual assault that resulted in the conception of a child, the court may hear the parties, experts, therapists, the department of human services, parenting-time supervisors, school personnel and other witnesses, and it “shall make findings on the record by a preponderance of the evidence whether a party has committed” it (C.R.S. § 14-10-124(1.5)(a)(III.5)). Then:

“(c) (I) If a court determines by a preponderance of the evidence that a party has committed domestic violence, child abuse or neglect, or sexual assault that resulted in the conception of a child, it is not in the best interests of the child to allocate mutual decision-making responsibility over the objection of the other party or the legal representative of the child unless the court makes specific findings that mutual decision-making can occur without coercion, intimidation, retaliation, or risk of harm to the abused party or the child; and (II) The court shall not appoint a parenting coordinator solely to ensure that mutual decision-making can be accomplished.”

C.R.S. § 14-10-124(1.5)(c)

Protective actions are not counted against a parent (C.R.S. § 14-10-124(1.5)(a)(VI)); a restriction must state its findings and may list the conditions for lifting it (C.R.S. § 14-10-124(1.5)(a)); and unsupervised time despite information of abuse requires a statement on the record of why (C.R.S. § 14-10-124(9)).

The safety conditions, in the statute’s words.

“(1.6) (a) If a court determines by a preponderance of the evidence that a party has committed domestic violence, child abuse or neglect, or sexual assault that resulted in the conception of a child, the court shall consider as the primary concern the safety and well-being of the child and the abused party. The court shall impose conditions on parenting time that ensure the safety of the child and abused party, giving paramount consideration to the safety and needs of the child and abused party. The parenting plan for a case described in this subsection (1.6) may include, but is not limited to, the following:”

C.R.S. § 14-10-124(1.6)(a)

Subsection (1.6)(b) lets the court order that party evaluated and treated at that party’s sole expense, with provider reports on progress and safety. Then:

“(c) If the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that a party has committed domestic violence, child abuse or neglect, or sexual assault that resulted in the conception of a child, the court shall consider whether it is in the best interests of the child to prohibit or restrict the parenting time of that party with the child. (d) If a party is absent or leaves home because of domestic violence, child abuse or neglect, or sexual assault that resulted in the conception of a child committed by the other party, the absence or leaving is not a factor in determining the best interests of the child.”

C.R.S. § 14-10-124(1.6)(c)-(d)

What changed on May 27, 2026.

What the court may not do. Where abuse is claimed, the court may not remove a child from a protective parent, or restrict their contact, solely to improve a deficient relationship with the accused parent, or order reunification treatment without “generally accepted and scientifically valid proof” of its safety and value (C.R.S. § 14-10-127.5(3)(b)). An order addressing a child’s resistance to a parent found to have committed domestic violence must address that parent’s behavior; an anger-management course or a self-directed program does not qualify (C.R.S. § 14-10-127.5(3)(c)). A child’s stated preference gets “strong consideration” if consistent with safety (C.R.S. § 14-10-127.5(3.5)).

Investigators, and lifting a restriction. Child and family investigators and evaluators must report domestic violence information however it was acquired and whoever presented it, including a child (C.R.S. § 14-10-116.5(2)(b.3)), and complete at least twenty hours of initial training (C.R.S. § 14-10-127.5(5)(a); Custody Evaluations). A restricted parent’s motion to lift a restriction is screened within thirty-five days, including for compliance with conditions; a frivolous or harassing one costs the filer the other side’s fees (C.R.S. § 14-10-129(2.5)).

Since May 2026 the finding, not the accusation, is what changes the orders. The evidence goes in at the hearing that makes it.

Maintenance and property: economic abuse, and the no-fault rule.

Colorado divides property and sets maintenance without regard to marital misconduct. Since August 6, 2025 the maintenance statute also tells the court to consider domestic violence. The two rules now sit side by side.

The maintenance factor.

Domestic violence, coercive control, economic abuse and litigation abuse are factors the court shall consider in maintenance. They are not a penalty, and no appellate court has yet reconciled them with the no-fault rule.

“(XII.5) Whether a spouse has engaged in domestic violence, coercive control, economic abuse, litigation abuse, emotional abuse, physical abuse, or unlawful sexual behavior against the other spouse”

C.R.S. § 14-10-114(3)(c)(XII.5)

The same statute still says an award “shall be made without regard to marital misconduct” (C.R.S. § 14-10-114(2)), and I know of no appellate decision yet reconciling the two. The honest reading is that the new factor is one the court shall consider, not a penalty. It matters most where economic abuse explains the numbers: a spouse kept out of school or work has a lower earning capacity for a reason, which bears on income and employability (C.R.S. § 14-10-114(3)(c)(V)) and on contributions to the other spouse’s advancement (C.R.S. § 14-10-114(3)(c)(X)). “Litigation abuse” is not defined in the divorce statute. The maintenance law: Spousal Maintenance.

Property: dissipation, not fault. Property is divided “without regard to marital misconduct” (C.R.S. § 14-10-113(1)). The exception is dissipation, where “one spouse depletes the marital estate for an improper or illegitimate purpose in contemplation of the dissolution,” “strictly confined” to “extreme cases” (In re Marriage of Smith, 2024 COA 95); dissipated property can be valued as of the date it last existed. Economic abuse is a parenting and maintenance issue, not a property-division factor. Tracing what was moved: Hidden Assets.

The automatic injunction. From service of the petition, both spouses are restrained from hiding or disposing of marital property outside the usual course of business or the necessities of life, from “molesting or disturbing the peace of the other party,” from taking the children out of Colorado without consent or an order, and from cancelling or letting health, home or auto insurance lapse without notice and consent (C.R.S. § 14-10-107(4)(b)(I)). Police “shall use every reasonable means to enforce” the no-molesting part when shown the petition, summons and proof of service (C.R.S. § 14-10-107(4.1)). Support while the case runs: Temporary Orders.

Mediation, and the divorce itself: no one can be sent to the table.

“Any court of record may, in its discretion, refer any case for mediation services or dispute resolution programs …; except that the court shall not refer the case to mediation services or dispute resolution programs where one of the parties claims that the party has been the victim of physical or psychological abuse by the other party, at any time and regardless of prior participation, and states that the party is thereby unwilling to enter into mediation services or dispute resolution programs.”

C.R.S. § 13-22-311(1)

The claim and the refusal are enough; no finding is required, and a party who mediated before can still decline. Settlement remains possible through counsel, or in a mediation where the spouses never share a room, if the protected spouse chooses it. More on Mediation & Litigation.

Filing the divorce. The petition must disclose protection orders between the spouses from the prior five years, with case numbers (C.R.S. § 14-10-107.8(1)), and the court must tell both parties about domestic violence services. The process: Divorce in Colorado; urgent relief inside the case: Emergency & Protection Orders.

Leaving Colorado with the children. The automatic injunction bars taking the children out of state without consent or an order. A court where the child is present may take temporary emergency jurisdiction when “it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse” (C.R.S. § 14-13-204(1)), and domestic violence is the first factor in choosing the more convenient forum (C.R.S. § 14-13-207(2)(a)). Get advice before crossing a state line: Interstate & International Custody.

Address, name, lease and work: the tools that exist.

Colorado’s protections for survivors are spread across several statutes, each with its own proof.

Evidence, and false allegations: the record decides.

A finding by a preponderance of the evidence is made on records. The ones that carry the most weight are the ones neither spouse created.

Admissibility is worked out before the hearing, not at it. The parenting court shall also consider coercive-control evidence and experts whose work with victims “is not solely forensic in nature” (C.R.S. § 14-10-127.5(3)(a)).

False allegations. They happen, and so does the opposite: the General Assembly wrote into the statute its finding that courts “believe fewer than one-fourth of claims that a parent has committed child physical or sexual abuse” (C.R.S. § 14-10-127.5(1)(a)). The law protects both sides. The petitioner carries the burden at the hearing; mutual orders require separate findings; fees can be shifted against a substantially groundless or frivolous claim (C.R.S. § 13-17-102); and an emergency motion to restrict parenting time found substantially frivolous, groundless or vexatious costs the filer the other side’s fees (C.R.S. § 14-10-129(5)). The defense is on False Allegations.

Six things people get wrong.

The domestic violence questions I am asked first.

Related: Protection Orders  ·  False Allegations  ·  Supervised Parenting Time  ·  Custody Evaluations  ·  Interstate & International Custody  ·  Military Divorce