State Court Motion in Limine - Colorado

MOTION IN LIMINE

(State of Colorado — District Court)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Certificate of Conferral
3. Motion and Hearing Request
4. Introduction
5. Evidence Sought to Be Excluded — Grounds and Argument
6. Legal Standard
7. Requested Relief (Admonition of Counsel and Witnesses)
8. Conclusion
9. Certificate of Service
10. Separate Proposed Order

1. CAPTION

Format the final caption under C.R.C.P. 10(d)(2)(III), including the required size of the Court Use Only box.

[MOVING PARTY]'S MOTION IN LIMINE [NO. ____ ]
TO EXCLUDE [SUBJECT OF MOTION]

2. CERTIFICATE OF CONFERRAL

Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 121 § 1-15(8), undersigned counsel certifies that on [__/__/____], counsel conferred with counsel for [opposing party] regarding the relief requested in this Motion. [Summarize outcome — e.g., "Opposing counsel opposes this Motion." / "Opposing counsel was unavailable after good-faith attempts to confer on [dates]."]

3. MOTION AND HEARING REQUEST

TO: ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD

[Moving Party] moves this Court in limine for an order excluding the evidence, testimony, argument, and references described below, and prohibiting mention of such matters before the jury until the Court rules on admissibility outside the jury's presence. Under C.R.C.P. 121 § 1-15(4)-(5), the Court may decide the motion on the papers or authorize a hearing. If the Court authorizes a hearing, the moving party will arrange and give notice of the setting as directed by the Court.

DATED: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

By: ______________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
[COLORADO BAR NO. ________________]
[FIRM ADDRESS]
[CITY, STATE ZIP]
[TELEPHONE] | [EMAIL]
Attorneys for [Moving Party]

4. INTRODUCTION

[Moving Party] respectfully moves this Court, in limine and pursuant to the Colorado Rules of Evidence, for an order excluding the categories of evidence identified below before they are offered, mentioned, or alluded to at trial. A motion in limine permits the Court to rule on admissibility in advance so that inadmissible and prejudicial matter is never placed before the jury and cannot be "unrung" by a later instruction to disregard. As set forth below, the challenged evidence is [irrelevant / unfairly prejudicial / inadmissible character evidence / inadmissible hearsay / barred by CRE 407, 408, or 411 / unreliable expert opinion under CRE 702 and People v. Shreck / improper "golden rule" or sympathy argument], and its admission would substantially prejudice [Moving Party] and confuse the issues before the jury.

5. EVIDENCE SOUGHT TO BE EXCLUDED — GROUNDS AND ARGUMENT

GROUND 1 — Irrelevant Evidence (CRE 401–402).
[Moving Party] moves to exclude [describe evidence]. Evidence is relevant only if it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." CRE 401. Irrelevant evidence is inadmissible. CRE 402. The challenged evidence has no bearing on any element, claim, or defense in this action because [explain], and should be excluded.

GROUND 2 — Unfair Prejudice / Confusion / Waste of Time (CRE 403).
[Moving Party] moves to exclude [describe evidence] because, even if marginally relevant, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. CRE 403. Specifically, [explain the prejudice and why it dwarfs any probative value].

GROUND 3 — Character Evidence and Prior Bad Acts (CRE 404).
[Moving Party] moves to exclude [describe evidence — e.g., prior arrests, prior lawsuits, "other acts," reputation, or propensity evidence]. Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is not admissible to prove action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion. CRE 404(a). Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove character to show conduct in conformity, and is admissible, if at all, only for a permissible non-propensity purpose such as motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident. CRE 404(b). The challenged evidence is offered solely to suggest propensity and should be excluded.

GROUND 4 — Improper Impeachment by Character or Prior Conviction (CRE 608; C.R.S. § 13-90-101).
[Moving Party] moves to exclude [describe evidence] as improper impeachment. CRE 608 generally bars extrinsic evidence of specific conduct offered to attack or support a witness's character for truthfulness, apart from convictions addressed by C.R.S. § 13-90-101. That statute permits proof of a felony conviction to affect a witness's credibility, but bars evidence of a felony conviction in a civil action when the witness was convicted five years before testifying. [Explain why the proposed impeachment falls outside the applicable provision.]

GROUND 5 — Hearsay (CRE 801–805).
[Moving Party] moves to exclude [describe out-of-court statements / documents] as inadmissible hearsay. The statements are out-of-court statements offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted (CRE 801) and are inadmissible (CRE 802) because no exception under CRE 803 or 804 applies, and [address any double hearsay under CRE 805].

GROUND 6 — Subsequent Remedial Measures (CRE 407).
[Moving Party] moves to exclude evidence of [describe repairs, design changes, policy changes, or other measures taken after the event]. When, after an injury or harm, measures are taken that would have made the injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct. CRE 407. Such evidence is admissible, if at all, only for another purpose (e.g., ownership, control, or feasibility, if controverted, or impeachment), none of which is genuinely at issue here.

GROUND 7 — Compromise and Settlement (CRE 408).
[Moving Party] moves to exclude evidence of [describe settlement offers, demands, or negotiations]. Evidence of furnishing, offering, or promising to furnish — or accepting, offering, or promising to accept — valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a disputed claim is not admissible to prove liability for, invalidity of, or amount of the claim. CRE 408. Statements made in compromise negotiations are likewise inadmissible.

GROUND 8 — Liability Insurance (CRE 411).
[Moving Party] moves to exclude any evidence, mention, or argument that [any party] was or was not insured against liability. Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible on the issue of whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. CRE 411. Any reference to insurance, coverage, or an insurer would be unfairly prejudicial and is barred.

GROUND 9 — Unreliable Expert Testimony (CRE 702; People v. Shreck).
[Moving Party] moves to exclude the opinions of [expert name] regarding [subject]. Under CRE 702 and People v. Shreck, 22 P.3d 68 (Colo. 2001), the trial court serves as a gatekeeper and must determine that (a) the scientific principles underlying the testimony are reasonably reliable; (b) the witness is qualified to opine on the subject; (c) the testimony will be useful to the jury; and (d) the probative value of the testimony is not substantially outweighed by the dangers identified in CRE 403. The inquiry is a flexible, totality-of-the-circumstances assessment, and admissible opinion must be grounded in the methods and procedures of science rather than subjective belief or unsupported speculation. The challenged opinions fail this standard because [identify the deficiency — e.g., unreliable methodology, analytical gap between data and opinion, lack of testing or error-rate analysis, ipse dixit, or lack of fit to the facts].

GROUND 10 — "Golden Rule," Sympathy, and Improper Appeals to Passion or Prejudice.
[Moving Party] moves to preclude counsel from making any "golden rule" argument (asking jurors to place themselves in the position of a party), any appeal to the jurors' personal interests as taxpayers or community members, or any argument calculated to inflame passion, sympathy, or prejudice rather than to address the evidence. Such argument is improper and unfairly prejudicial under CRE 403.

GROUND 11 — [Additional Category].
[Moving Party] moves to exclude [describe additional evidence and cite the governing rule].

6. LEGAL STANDARD

A motion in limine is a recognized procedural device by which a party seeks a pretrial ruling on the admissibility of evidence so that prejudicial or inadmissible matter is excluded before it reaches the jury. The trial court has broad discretion to control the admission of evidence under the Colorado Rules of Evidence.

The foundational principle is relevance: relevant evidence is admissible unless otherwise provided, and irrelevant evidence is inadmissible. CRE 401–402. Even relevant evidence "may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence." CRE 403. The Rules further bar propensity character evidence (CRE 404), evidence of subsequent remedial measures (CRE 407), compromise and settlement (CRE 408), and liability insurance (CRE 411), and they exclude hearsay not within a recognized exception (CRE 801–805).

Expert opinion is governed by CRE 702 as construed in People v. Shreck, 22 P.3d 68 (Colo. 2001). The Court must find the underlying scientific principles reasonably reliable, the witness qualified, and the testimony useful to the trier of fact, and must confirm that the probative value is not substantially outweighed by CRE 403 concerns. Colorado's standard is intentionally liberal and admissibility-favoring, but it requires that expert opinion rest on reliable methodology rather than subjective belief or unsupported speculation.

7. REQUESTED RELIEF

WHEREFORE, [Moving Party] respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order:

1. GRANTING this Motion in Limine and EXCLUDING the categories of evidence, testimony, argument, and references identified above;
2. PROHIBITING all counsel, parties, and witnesses from offering, mentioning, referring to, or alluding to the excluded matters — directly or indirectly — in the presence of the jury, including during voir dire, opening statements, examination of witnesses, and closing argument;
3. DIRECTING counsel to instruct and admonish their respective witnesses, before they testify, not to mention, refer to, or volunteer any of the excluded matters in the presence of the jury;
4. REQUIRING that, before any party seeks to offer or reference any excluded matter, counsel first approach the bench and obtain a ruling outside the presence of the jury; and
5. GRANTING such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

8. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, [Moving Party] respectfully requests that the Court grant this Motion in Limine in its entirety.

DATED: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

______________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME]
[Colorado Bar No. ________________]
Attorneys for [Moving Party]

9. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion in Limine was filed with the Court via Colorado Courts E-Filing and served on the following:

[Opposing Counsel Name]
[Firm Name]
[Address]
[City, State ZIP]
[Email]

via [CCE / email / mail]

______________________________
[Attorney Name]
[Colorado Bar No. ________________]

SEPARATE PROPOSED ORDER

File the following order as a separate, editable document under C.R.C.P. 121 § 1-15(10); do not attach it as an exhibit to the motion or put “proposed” in its caption.

ORDER ON [MOVING PARTY]'S MOTION IN LIMINE

THIS MATTER came before the Court on [Moving Party]'s Motion in Limine. The Court, having reviewed the Motion, any response and reply, and being fully advised, hereby ORDERS:

The Motion is:

☐ GRANTED in its entirety. The categories of evidence identified in the Motion are EXCLUDED, and all counsel, parties, and witnesses are prohibited from mentioning, referring to, or offering such matters in the presence of the jury without first obtaining leave of Court outside the jury's presence.

☐ GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: [________________________________].

☐ DENIED.

Counsel shall instruct and admonish their witnesses in accordance with this Order.

SO ORDERED this ______ day of ________________, 20____.

______________________________
District Court Judge

Sources and References

• Colorado Rules of Evidence (CRE) 401–403, 404, 407, 408, 411, 608, 702, 801–805 — Colorado Judicial Branch / Colorado Rules of Evidence: https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/
• People v. Shreck, 22 P.3d 68 (Colo. 2001) (CRE 702 reliability/gatekeeping standard): https://caselaw.findlaw.com/
• People v. Ramirez, 155 P.3d 371 (Colo. 2007) (usefulness prong of CRE 702): https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/co-supreme-court/1187150.html
• C.R.C.P. 121 § 1-15 (motions and duty to confer): https://www.courts.state.co.us/
• § 13-90-101, C.R.S. (impeachment by prior felony conviction; five-year civil-action limit), official 2026 compilation: https://olls.info/crs/crs2026-title-13.htm
• Colorado Supreme Court Advisory Committee, CRE/FRE comparison, p. 48 (CRE 608(b) excepts convictions under § 13-90-101; “Rule 609. Reserved. There is no Colorado Rule 609”): https://www.coloradojudicial.gov/media/13819