1-7-601. Judges’ certificate and statement

Overview of Statute

(1) As soon as all the votes have been read and counted, either at the precincts or at the electronic balloting counting centers, the election judges shall make a certificate for each precinct, stating the name of each candidate, the office for which that candidate received votes, and stating the number of votes each candidate received. The number shall be expressed in numerical figures. The entry shall be made, as nearly as circumstances will permit, in the following form:

At an election held ……………….., in precinct ……, in the county of ………………. and state of Colorado, on the ………………. day of ………………. in the year ……, the following named candidates received the number of votes annexed to their respective names for the following described offices: Total number of ballots or votes cast was …. A.B. and E.F. had 72
votes for governor and lieutenant governor; C.D. and G.H. had 69 votes for governor and lieutenant governor; J.K. had 68 votes for representative in congress; L.M. had 70 votes for representative in congress; N.O. had 72 votes for state representative; P.Q. had 71 votes for state representative; R.S. had 84 votes for sheriff; T.W. had 60 votes for sheriff; (and the same manner for any other persons voted for).

Certified by us:—A.B.<N>)—C.D.<N>)—E.F.<N>)<N>Election Judges

(1.5) In addition to the information required by subsection (1) of this section, the certificate prepared by the election judges for each precinct shall state the ballot title and submission clause of any ballot issue or ballot question voted upon in the election and the number of votes counted for and against the ballot issue or ballot question.

(2) In addition, the election judges shall make a written statement showing the number of ballots voted, making a separate statement of the number of unofficial and substitute ballots voted, the number of ballots delivered to electors, the number of spoiled ballots, the number of ballots not delivered to electors, and the number of ballots returned, identifying and specifying the same. All unused ballots, spoiled ballots, and stubs of ballots voted shall be returned with the statement.

(3) Any judges’ certificates and statements may be combined into one document if so directed by the designated election official.

Source: L. 92: Entire article R&RE, p. 750, § 9, effective January 1, 1993.L. 93: (3) added, p. 1422, § 78, effective July 1.L. 2007: (1) amended and (1.5) added, p. 1980, § 30, effective August 3.

Editor’s note: Articles 1 to 13 were numbered as articles 1, 3, 4, 9 to 19, and 21 of chapter 49, C.R.S. 1963. The substantive provisions of these articles were repealed and reenacted in 1980, resulting in the addition, relocation, and elimination of sections as well as subject matter. For amendments to these articles prior to 1980, consult the Colorado statutory research explanatory note and the table itemizing the replacement volumes and supplements to the original volume of C.R.S. 1973 beginning on page vii in the front of this volume. Former C.R.S. numbers prior to 1980 are shown in editor’s notes following those sections that were relocated. For a detailed comparison of these articles for 1980, see the comparative tables located in the back of the index.

Cross references: For school elections, see articles 30, 31, and 42 of title 22; for elections for removal of county seats, see article 8 of title 30; for municipal elections, see article 10 of title 31; for special district elections, see part 8 of article 1 of title 32; for exemption of certain statutory proceedings from the rules of civil procedure, see C.R.C.P. 81; for recall from office, see article XXI of the state constitution; for recall of state and county officers, see part 1 of article 12 of this title; for recall of municipal officers, see part 5 of article 4 of title 31; for recall of directors of special districts, see § § 32-1-906, 32-1-907.

Editor’s note: Articles 1 to 13 were repealed and reenacted in 1980, and this article was subsequently repealed and reenacted in 1992, resulting in the addition, relocation, and elimination of sections as well as subject matter. For amendments to this article prior to 1992, consult the Colorado statutory research explanatory note and the table itemizing the replacement volumes and supplements to the original volume of C.R.S. 1973 beginning on page vii in the front of this volume and the editor’s note following the title heading. Former C.R.S. section numbers are shown in editor’s notes following those sections that were relocated in 1992. For a detailed comparison of this article for 1980 and 1992, see the comparative tables located in the back of the index.

Cross references: For election offenses relating to conduct of elections, see part 7 of article 13 of this title.

Editor’s note: This section is similar to former § 1-7-310 as it existed prior to 1992.
 
ANNOTATIONS

Annotator’s note. The following annotations include cases decided under former provisions similar to this section.

Holding that judges are required to make a certificate in such form that it could not be changed except it would show evidence of having been tampered with. People ex rel. Miller v. Tool, 35 Colo. 225, 86 P. 224, 86 P. 229, 86 P. 231 (1905).

Holding that tally sheets are insufficient to contradict certificates. In the face of this section it certainly was not the purpose of the general assembly to allow mere tally sheets, which are not certified, contain nothing more than strokes of pen or pencil with respect to the number of votes cast for any candidate, and can be readily changed, to be taken as evidence sufficient to contradict the certificates in case of a discrepancy between such certificates and the tally sheets. People ex rel. Miller v. Tool, 35 Colo. 225, 86 P. 224, 86 P. 229, 86 P. 231 (1905).

Holding that irregularities committed by judges of election in the certification of their returns do not invalidate the returns unless they are in such a state as to render it impossible to ascertain therefrom the vote and for whom cast. Lehman v. Pettingell, 39 Colo. 258, 89 P. 48 (1907).

Holding that such returns must be canvassed and certified by the canvassing board. Lehman v. Pettingell, 39 Colo. 258, 89 P. 48 (1907).

Holding that where the judges did not receive the pollbooks required in time for use on election day and thereupon kept a list of the voters and made a tally of the votes on sample ballots, and the judges, after certifying to the result of the election, although not in the manner and form prescribed, delivered the returns to the county clerk within a few days after election, but the board of canvassers refused to count and canvass said returns, although no other returns were received from that precinct, solely because the certificates and oaths were not in the form and the returns upon the proper blanks, such irregularities did not invalidate the returns, and it further appearing that the precinct judges in good faith undertook to certify the true result of the precinct election and that the result could be ascertained therefrom, it became the duty of the board to canvass such returns and to issue certificates in accordance with the result. Lehman v. Pettingell, 39 Colo. 258, 80 P. 48 (1907).

Holding that an injunction lies to prevent judges of election from committing or permitting fraud. The state upon the relation of the attorney general may invoke the powers of the supreme court for a writ of injunction to prevent the judges of election and other officers in control of an election from committing, and from permitting others to commit, frauds at elections and to secure a judicial enforcement of the statutes relating to elections so as to prevent the perpetration of such frauds. People ex rel. Miller v. Tool, 35 Colo. 225, 86 P. 224, 86 P. 229, 86 P. 231 (1905).

Holding that questions being purely judicial and not political. People ex rel. Miller v. Tool, 35 Colo. 225, 86 P. 224, 86 P. 229, 86 P. 231 (1905).