-
<div data-spec-version="0.0.3dev" data-generated-on="2024-06-13"> <div class="generated-from-iceberg vlex-toc"> <link href="https://doc-stylesheets.vlex.com/ldml-xml.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"></link> <div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-header header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Header" data-refglobal="case:plemmonsvpeopleofthestateofcoloradocaseno21sc183517p3d1210september26,2022"><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-cite"><b class="ldml-bold">
517 P.3d 1210</b></span></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">Cheryl Lynette PLEMMONS</span>, <span class="ldml-role">Petitioner</span></span>,</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold">v.</b><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado</span>, <span class="ldml-role">Respondent</span></span>.</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold">Supreme Court <span class="ldml-cite">Case No. 21SC183</span> </b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-court">Supreme Court of Colorado</span>.</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-date"><b class="ldml-bold">September 26, 2022</b></span></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-date"><b class="ldml-bold">Rehearing Denied October 17, 2022</b></span></p></div><div class="ldml-counsel header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Counsel"><p data-paragraph-id="207" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="207" data-sentence-id="207" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-role">Petitioner</span></span>: <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Megan A. Ring</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Public Defender</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Jacob B. McMahon</span></span>, Deputy <span class="ldml-entity">Public Defender</span>, Denver, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="323" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="323" data-sentence-id="323" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-role">Respondent</span></span>: <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Philip J. Weiser</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Patrick A. Withers</span></span>, Assistant <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, Denver, Colorado</span></p></div><h2 class="ldml-opinionheading"><span data-paragraph-id="449" class="ldml-paragraph "><span class="ldml-judgepanel"><span data-paragraph-id="449" data-sentence-id="449" class="ldml-sentence">En Banc</span></span></span></h2><div class="ldml-opinion"><p data-paragraph-id="456" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-4"><span class="ldml-opinionauthor content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label=" Opinion (HOOD, BOATRIGHT, HART, SAMOUR, BERKENKOTTER)"><span data-paragraph-id="456" data-sentence-id="456" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">HOOD</span></span> <span class="ldml-opiniontype">delivered <span class="ldml-entity">the Opinion of <span class="ldml-entity">the Court</span></span></span>, in which CHIEF JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">BOATRIGHT</span></span>, JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">HART</span></span>, JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">SAMOUR</span></span>, and JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">BERKENKOTTER</span></span> joined</span>.</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="601" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="601" data-sentence-id="601" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity">GABRIEL</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">joined by JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity">MÁRQUEZ</span></span>, concurred in the judgment.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-opinion"><p data-paragraph-id="671" class="ldml-paragraph "><span class="ldml-opinionauthor content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Opinion (HOOD)"><span data-paragraph-id="671" data-sentence-id="671" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">HOOD</span></span> <span class="ldml-opiniontype">delivered <span class="ldml-entity">the Opinion of <span class="ldml-entity">the Court</span></span></span></span>.</span></span><span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1214" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_719"></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="719" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="719" data-sentence-id="720" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_720"><span class="ldml-cite">¶1</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">Defendant</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Cheryl Plemmons</span>, intentionally spat on two sheriff deputies while <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> were attempting to determine if <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> was suicidal.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="719" data-sentence-id="855" class="ldml-sentence">The deputies arrested her for spitting on them, and <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> charged her with three counts of second degree assault: one under <span class="ldml-entity">section</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2022</span>)</span></a></span>, and two under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_855"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="719" data-sentence-id="1068" class="ldml-sentence">A jury found her guilty of each count.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="1106" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="1106" data-sentence-id="1106" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1106"><span class="ldml-cite">¶2</span></a></span> On appeal, Plemmons argued that <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> incorrectly instructed the jury on an element of the offense: the scope of the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> as it relates to her intent in spitting on the officers.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1106" data-sentence-id="1305" class="ldml-sentence">A division of <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> affirmed the judgment of conviction.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1106" data-sentence-id="1377" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1305" data-refglobal="case:peoplevplemmons,2021coa10"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Plemmons</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2021 COA 10</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1305"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 2</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">
490 P.3d 1112, 1115</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="1435" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="1435" data-sentence-id="1435" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1435"><span class="ldml-cite">¶3</span></a></span> Like <span class="ldml-entity">the courts</span> below, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> hold that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> as used in <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1435"><span class="ldml-cite">subsections 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span> encompasses more than just physical harm.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1435" data-sentence-id="1574" class="ldml-sentence">Psychological harm can suffice.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1435" data-sentence-id="1606" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> agree with the division that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>, in using the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> intended these subsections to criminalize as second degree assault prolonged psychological or emotional harm that stems from the possibility that an officer has been infected by or could become a vector for disease.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1435" data-sentence-id="1897" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1606" data-refglobal="case:peoplevplemmons,2021coa10"><span class="ldml-refname">Plemmons</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1606"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 45</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">490 P.3d at 1122</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1435" data-sentence-id="1931" class="ldml-sentence">But <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> conclude that Plemmons is entitled to a new trial because <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span>'s jury instructions didn't accurately convey the meaning of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> to the jury.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="1435" data-sentence-id="2092" class="ldml-sentence">Thus, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> affirm in part and reverse in part the division's judgment.</span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-confidences="very_high" data-ordinal_end="1" data-value="I. Facts and Procedural History" data-parsed="true" data-types="background" data-specifier="I" data-ordinal_start="1" data-id="heading_2160" data-content-heading-label="I. Facts and Procedural History" id="heading_2160"><span data-paragraph-id="2160" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="2160" data-sentence-id="2160" class="ldml-sentence">I.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2160" data-sentence-id="2163" class="ldml-sentence">Facts and Procedural History</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="2191" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="2191" data-sentence-id="2191" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2191"><span class="ldml-cite">¶4</span></a></span> Plemmons called a friend one evening to say <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> planned to commit suicide.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2191" data-sentence-id="2269" class="ldml-sentence">Following an anonymous call from Plemmons's friend to the police, sheriff deputies <span class="ldml-entity">Scott Blakely</span> and <span class="ldml-entity">Richard Paige</span> conducted a welfare check at Plemmons's home.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="2429" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="2429" data-sentence-id="2429" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2429"><span class="ldml-cite">¶5</span></a></span> Blakely and Paige found Plemmons at her home with another friend.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2429" data-sentence-id="2498" class="ldml-sentence">Upon the deputies' entry into her home, Plemmons, who was visibly drunk, berated them and told them to leave.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2429" data-sentence-id="2608" class="ldml-sentence">After calming down enough to talk to Paige, Plemmons said <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> had considered committing suicide by carbon monoxide poisoning and motioned toward her oven.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2429" data-sentence-id="2763" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">She</span> then added that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> might slit her throat.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2429" data-sentence-id="2810" class="ldml-sentence">At that point, <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> picked up a small knife.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2429" data-sentence-id="2854" class="ldml-sentence">As both deputies reached for their tasers, Plemmons flung the knife across the room, away from the deputies but toward her friend.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="2984" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="2984" data-sentence-id="2984" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2984"><span class="ldml-cite">¶6</span></a></span> The deputies handcuffed Plemmons and placed her in protective custody, which, Blakely explained at trial, meant <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> would transport her to a hospital for treatment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2984" data-sentence-id="3153" class="ldml-sentence">Because it was cold outside, the deputies began to help Plemmons put on her coat and boots.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2984" data-sentence-id="3245" class="ldml-sentence">Plemmons then spat in both deputies' faces, causing the deputies to shift from taking Plemmons into protective custody to placing her under arrest.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="3392" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="3392" data-sentence-id="3392" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3392"><span class="ldml-cite">¶7</span></a></span> The deputies put Plemmons in the back of Paige's patrol car.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3392" data-sentence-id="3456" class="ldml-sentence">Despite the arrest, the deputies decided to first take Plemmons to a hospital for medical evaluation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3392" data-sentence-id="3558" class="ldml-sentence">On the way to the hospital, Plemmons continued to insult Paige, and <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> spat on him through the partition, hitting the side of his face and back of his head.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3392" data-sentence-id="3716" class="ldml-sentence">As a result, the deputies placed a spit hood over Plemmons's head for the rest of the trip.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3392" data-sentence-id="3808" class="ldml-sentence">After medical staff cleared Plemmons, Paige transported her to jail.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="3876" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="3876" data-sentence-id="3876" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3876"><span class="ldml-cite">¶8</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">The prosecution</span> charged Plemmons with two counts of second degree assault under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3876"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> for the spitting incidents inside her home, and one count of second degree assault under <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_3876"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span> for spitting on Paige inside the patrol car.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="4140" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="4140" data-sentence-id="4140" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4140"><span class="ldml-cite">¶9</span></a></span> As relevant here, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4140"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> provides:<span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1215" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_4193"></span></span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_4193" class="ldml-blockquote"> <span data-sentence-id="4194" class="ldml-sentence">A person commits the crime of assault in the second degree if: <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[w]</span>ith intent to infect, injure, or <i class="ldml-italics">harm</i> another person whom the actor knows or reasonably should know to be engaged in the performance of his or her duties as a peace officer, ... <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> or <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> causes such person to come into contact with ... saliva ... by any means ....</span></blockquote><p data-paragraph-id="4525" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="4525" data-sentence-id="4525" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">Emphasis added</span>.)</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="4525" data-sentence-id="4543" class="ldml-sentence">And <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4543"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> defines second degree assault as:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_4608" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="4608" class="ldml-sentence">While lawfully confined in a detention facility<a href="#note-fr1" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr1">1</a> within this state, a person with intent to infect, injure, <i class="ldml-italics">harm</i> , harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm a person in a detention facility whom the actor knows or reasonably should know to be an employee of a detention facility, causes such employee to come into contact with ... saliva ... by any means ....<a href="#note-fr2" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr2">2</a></span> </blockquote><p data-paragraph-id="4959" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="4959" data-sentence-id="4959" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">Emphasis added</span>.)</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="4976" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="4976" data-sentence-id="4976" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4976"><span class="ldml-cite">¶10</span></a></span> Plemmons sought dismissal of <span class="ldml-entity">the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4976"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> charges</span>, arguing that the provision is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4976" data-sentence-id="5107" class="ldml-sentence">While <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> denied the motion, it found the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> as used in <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>, ambiguous.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4976" data-sentence-id="5209" class="ldml-sentence">Therefore, <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> turned to interpretive aids and concluded that the term means something different than <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect"</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure"</span> and that it is limited to psychological and emotional trauma stemming from unwanted contact with bodily fluids or dangerous substances.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="5479" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="5479" data-sentence-id="5479" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5479"><span class="ldml-cite">¶11</span></a></span> Over Plemmons's objection, <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> instructed the jury, in part, as follows:</span></p><div class="ldml-embeddeddocument"><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_5567" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="5567" class="ldml-sentence">The term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> ... means psychological or emotional harm.</span> <span data-sentence-id="5626" class="ldml-sentence">It can include the following</span></blockquote><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_5654" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="5654" class="ldml-sentence">1. fear,</span></blockquote><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_5662" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="5662" class="ldml-sentence">2. anxiety,</span></blockquote><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_5673" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="5673" class="ldml-sentence">3. or other type of significant distress</span></blockquote><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_5713" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="5713" class="ldml-sentence">that is based upon the danger of injury or infection from contact with the bodily fluids.</span> <span data-sentence-id="5803" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The defendant</span> need not have acted with the intent to cause harm that is permanent or long-lasting in nature, but <span class="ldml-entity">the defendant</span>'s intent must have been to cause psychological or emotional harm that is not fleeting or minimal in nature.</span></blockquote></div><p data-paragraph-id="6037" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="6037" data-sentence-id="6037" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6037"><span class="ldml-cite">¶12</span></a></span> The jury found Plemmons guilty as charged.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="6083" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="6083" data-sentence-id="6083" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6083"><span class="ldml-cite">¶13</span></a></span> On appeal, Plemmons argued that <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> erroneously instructed the jury on the definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> as it applied to all three convictions because the instruction: <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span> deviated from the statutory text by adding psychological and emotional harm; <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span> blurred the line between second degree assault under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6083"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> and third degree assault under <span class="ldml-entity">section</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2022</span>)</span></a></span><a href="#note-fr3" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr3">3</a> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span> invited the jury to speculate about the potential scope of the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span>; <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(4)</span> left unclear whether the phrase <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"based upon the danger of injury or infection from contact with bodily fluids"</span> modified all the listed examples of harm; and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5)</span> left uncertain how serious an intended harm needed to be to fall within <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6083" data-sentence-id="6813" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6083" data-refglobal="case:peoplevplemmons,2021coa10"><span class="ldml-refname">Plemmons</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6083"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 43</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">490 P.3d at 1121–22</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="6849" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="6849" data-sentence-id="6849" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6849"><span class="ldml-cite">¶14</span></a></span> Plemmons also claimed that the evidence was insufficient to establish that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> spat on the deputies with the intent to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect, injure, or harm"</span> them, as <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6849"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> requires.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6849" data-sentence-id="7040" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6849" data-refglobal="case:peoplevplemmons,2021coa10"><span class="ldml-refname">Plemmons</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6849"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 33</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">490 P.3d at 1120</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="7073" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="7073" data-sentence-id="7073" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7073"><span class="ldml-cite">¶15</span></a></span> The division affirmed.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7073" data-sentence-id="7100" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7100"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7100"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 62</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7100" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">490 P.3d at 1124</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7073" data-sentence-id="7131" class="ldml-sentence">In rejecting Plemmons's jury instruction argument, it concluded: <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span> <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span>'s <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"construction of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘harm’</span> was consistent <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1216" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_7257"></span> with the General Assembly's intent"</span>; <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span> <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span>'s definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> requires the psychological harm for second degree assault to be based <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"upon the danger of injury or infection from contact with bodily fluids"</span>; <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span> the jurors were not invited to speculate about applications beyond the bounds of <span class="ldml-entity">the court</span>'s limiting instruction; <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(4)</span> the structure of the instruction's second sentence makes clear that the phrase <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"based upon the danger of injury or infection from contact with bodily fluids"</span> applies to all three examples included in that sentence; and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(5)</span> the jury instruction <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"can be administered clearly"</span> because <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"clarifying that the harm associated with second degree assault need not be permanent, but also must be more than <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘fleeting or minimal in nature,’</span> helps differentiate <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘harm’</span> from the lesser injuries such as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘alarm’</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘annoy’</span> that appear in the third degree assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="7073" data-sentence-id="8157" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8157" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8157"><span class="ldml-cite">¶¶ 44–48</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8157" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">490 P.3d at 1122</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="8191" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="8191" data-sentence-id="8191" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8191"><span class="ldml-cite">¶16</span></a></span> In rejecting Plemmons's sufficiency argument, the division examined evidence reflecting her mental state.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8191" data-sentence-id="8301" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8301"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8301"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 36</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8301" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">490 P.3d at 1120</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8191" data-sentence-id="8332" class="ldml-sentence">Plemmons acknowledged that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> yelled at the deputies, directed demeaning language at them, and even implied that Paige and his family weren't safe.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8191" data-sentence-id="8481" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8332" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="8191" data-sentence-id="8485" class="ldml-sentence">Given evidence of Plemmons's demeanor and the circumstances leading to the charged acts, the division determined that there was sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude that Plemmons intended to inflict psychological or emotional harm on the deputies by spitting on them.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8191" data-sentence-id="8761" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8761" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8761"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 37</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8761" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">490 P.3d at 1121</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="8791" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="8791" data-sentence-id="8791" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8791"><span class="ldml-cite">¶17</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> granted certiorari review.<a href="#note-fr4" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr4">4</a></span> </p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-confidences="very_high" data-ordinal_end="2" data-value="II. Analysis" data-parsed="true" data-types="analysis" data-specifier="II" data-ordinal_start="2" data-id="heading_8825" data-content-heading-label="II. Analysis" id="heading_8825"><span data-paragraph-id="8825" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="8825" data-sentence-id="8825" class="ldml-sentence">II.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8825" data-sentence-id="8829" class="ldml-sentence">Analysis</span></b></span></section><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-specifier="A" data-value="A. "Harm" Instruction" data-parsed="true" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-ordinal_end="1" data-ordinal_start="1" data-id="heading_8837" data-content-heading-label="A. "Harm" Instruction" id="heading_8837"><span data-paragraph-id="8837" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="8837" data-sentence-id="8837" class="ldml-sentence">A.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8837" data-sentence-id="8840" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Harm"</span> Instruction</span></b></span></section><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-specifier="1" data-value="1. Preservation" data-parsed="true" data-format="number" data-ordinal_end="1" data-ordinal_start="1" data-id="heading_8858" data-content-heading-label="1. Preservation" id="heading_8858"><span data-paragraph-id="8858" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="8858" data-sentence-id="8858" class="ldml-sentence">1.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8858" data-sentence-id="8861" class="ldml-sentence">Preservation</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="8873" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="8873" data-sentence-id="8873" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8873"><span class="ldml-cite">¶18</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">The prosecution</span> argues that Plemmons forfeited her instructional error challenge.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8873" data-sentence-id="8959" class="ldml-sentence">While it acknowledges that Plemmons objected to certain parts of the relevant jury instruction, it contends that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> now argues for the first time that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> encompasses physical but not psychological or emotional injury.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8873" data-sentence-id="9182" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> are not persuaded.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="9203" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="9203" data-sentence-id="9204" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9204"><span class="ldml-cite">¶19 A</span></a></span> party forfeits an alleged error for appellate purposes—meaning that review is only for plain error—by <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"fail<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ing]</span> to make the timely assertion of a right."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="9203" data-sentence-id="9365" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895668608" data-vids="895668608" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9204"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Rediger</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2018 CO 32</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9204"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 40</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895668608" data-vids="895668608" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
416 P.3d 893, 902</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893230940" data-vids="893230940" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">United States v. Olano</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
507 U.S. 725, 733</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
113 S.Ct. 1770</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
123 L.Ed.2d 508</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1993</span>)</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9203" data-sentence-id="9514" class="ldml-sentence">However, <span class="ldml-entity">a party</span> need not recite <span class="ldml-quotation quote">" <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘talismanic language’</span> to preserve particular arguments for appeal"</span>; rather, it need only <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"present <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> with <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘an adequate opportunity to make findings of fact and conclusions of law’</span> on the issue."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="9203" data-sentence-id="9757" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893696321" data-vids="893696321" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9514"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Martinez v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2015 CO 16</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9514"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893696321" data-vids="893696321" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
344 P.3d 862, 868</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/889625979" data-vids="889625979" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Melendez</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
102 P.3d 315, 322</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2004</span>)</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="9875" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="9875" data-sentence-id="9876" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9876"><span class="ldml-cite">¶20</span></a></span> Plemmons repeatedly argued to <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> and on appeal that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> intended <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> to mean just physical harm.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9875" data-sentence-id="10005" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">She</span> expressly asked <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"just strike <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘harm’</span> ... from <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> because <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[the <span class="ldml-entity">prosecutor</span>]</span> is saying that it means physically injure"</span> and that was already covered by <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect or injure"</span> in <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9875" data-sentence-id="10220" class="ldml-sentence">And <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> directly responded to that argument.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9875" data-sentence-id="10277" class="ldml-sentence">When discussing the instruction on <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> expressly stated that it <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"d<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[idn't]</span> think that harm mean<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[t]</span> physical injury,"</span> but rather that, with <span class="ldml-entity">this statute</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> was trying to address the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"emotional distress"</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"emotional damage"</span> specifically related to the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"distress,"</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"panic,"</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"extreme concern"</span> that a peace officer would be injured or infected by the bodily fluids in question.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="10687" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="10687" data-sentence-id="10687" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10687"><span class="ldml-cite">¶21</span></a></span> Plemmons's arguments <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"allow<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ed]</span> <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> a meaningful chance to prevent or correct the error and create<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[d]</span> a record for appellate review."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="10687" data-sentence-id="10837" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893696321" data-vids="893696321" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10687"><span class="ldml-refname">Martinez</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10687"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893696321" data-vids="893696321" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
344 P.3d at868</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10687" data-sentence-id="10875" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> conclude, therefore, that Plemmons didn't forfeit her instructional error challenge.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-specifier="2" data-value="2. Standard of Review and Rules of Statutory Interpretation" data-parsed="true" data-format="number" data-ordinal_end="2" data-ordinal_start="2" data-id="heading_10962" data-content-heading-label="2. Standard of Review and Rules of Statutory Interpretation" id="heading_10962"><span data-paragraph-id="10962" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="10962" data-sentence-id="10962" class="ldml-sentence">2.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10962" data-sentence-id="10965" class="ldml-sentence">Standard of Review and Rules of Statutory Interpretation</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="11021" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="11021" data-sentence-id="11022" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11022"><span class="ldml-cite">¶22</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">We</span> review jury instructions de novo to determine whether <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> accurately <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1217" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_11100"></span> inform the jury of the governing law."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11021" data-sentence-id="11140" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11022" data-refglobal="case:hoggardvpeople,2020co54"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Hoggard v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2020 CO 54</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11022"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 12</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:465p3d34,38"><span class="ldml-cite">
465 P.3d 34, 38</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11021" data-sentence-id="11194" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"In order to evaluate whether jury instructions properly state the law or are misleading, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> ... must consider the criminal <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span> themselves,"</span> which <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> also review de novo.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11021" data-sentence-id="11370" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/934099257" data-vids="934099257" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11194"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Garcia v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2022 CO 6</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11194"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 16</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:503p3d135,140"><span class="ldml-cite">
503 P.3d 135, 140</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="11423" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="11423" data-sentence-id="11424" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11424"><span class="ldml-cite">¶23</span></a></span> Because it is <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"the prerogative of <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> to define crimes and prescribe punishments,"</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/885893314" data-vids="885893314" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11424"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Bott</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2020 CO 86</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11424"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 8</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/885893314" data-vids="885893314" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11424"><span class="ldml-cite">
477 P.3d 137, 139</span></a></span>, when <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"construing <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, our primary purpose is to ascertain and give effect to <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s intent,"</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11424"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">McCoy v. People</i></span> , <span class="ldml-cite">
2019 CO 44</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11424"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 37</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11424"><span class="ldml-cite">
442 P.3d 379, 389</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11423" data-sentence-id="11740" class="ldml-sentence">To do so, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> give <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>'s <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"words and phrases their plain and ordinary meanings,"</span> and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"read statutory words and phrases in context."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11423" data-sentence-id="11881" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11740"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11423" data-sentence-id="11885" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">We</span> must also endeavor to effectuate the purpose of the legislative scheme ... read<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ing]</span> that scheme as a whole<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[;]</span> giving consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect to all of its parts<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[;]</span> and ... avoid<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ing]</span> constructions that would render any words or phrases superfluous ...."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11423" data-sentence-id="12164" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12164"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12164"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 38</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12164"><span class="ldml-cite">
442 P.3d at389</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11423" data-sentence-id="12194" class="ldml-sentence">If <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> is unambiguous, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">we</span> apply it as written."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="11423" data-sentence-id="12251" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12194" data-refglobal="case:peoplevjones,2020co45"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Jones</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2020 CO 45</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12194"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 54</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/892266641" data-vids="892266641" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
464 P.3d 735, 746</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11423" data-sentence-id="12305" class="ldml-sentence">But if the language is susceptible of more than one reasonable interpretation, it is ambiguous, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> may use extrinsic aids of construction.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="11423" data-sentence-id="12448" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/892266641" data-vids="892266641" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12448"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12448"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 55</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/892266641" data-vids="892266641" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12448"><span class="ldml-cite">464 P.3d at 746</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="12477" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="12477" data-sentence-id="12478" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12478"><span class="ldml-cite">¶24</span></a></span> In interpreting ambiguous <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> are further directed, if possible, to avoid interpretations that would render <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> unconstitutional.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12477" data-sentence-id="12629" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/892304173" data-vids="892304173" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12478"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">United States v. Davis</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">––– U.S. ––––</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
139 S. Ct. 2319, 2332 n.6</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
204 L.Ed.2d 757</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2019</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12478" data-refglobal="case:peoplevross,2021co9"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Ross</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2021 CO 9</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12478"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 35</span></a></span></span> n.6, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890251622" data-vids="890251622" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
479 P.3d 910, 917 n.6</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12477" data-sentence-id="12780" class="ldml-sentence">And <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> are mindful that although <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Colorado's guarantee of equal protection is violated where two criminal <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span> proscribe identical conduct, yet one punishes that conduct more harshly,"</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12780" data-refglobal="case:peoplevlee,2020co81"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Lee</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2020 CO 81</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12780"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895646552" data-vids="895646552" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12780"><span class="ldml-cite">
476 P.3d 351, 354</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12780" data-refglobal="case:deanvpeople,2016co14"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Dean v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2016 CO 14</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12780"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891947016" data-vids="891947016" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12780"><span class="ldml-cite">
366 P.3d 593, 597</span></a></span> )</span></span>, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"equal protection is not violated so long as the legislative classification is not arbitrary or unreasonable, and the differences in the provisions bear a reasonable relationship to the public policy to be achieved,"</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12780" data-refglobal="case:deanvpeople,2016co14"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Dean</i></span></a></span> , <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12780"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 16</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891947016" data-vids="891947016" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12780"><span class="ldml-cite">
366 P.3d at598</span></a></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-specifier="3" data-value="3. Interpretation of "Harm" in Section 18-3-203" data-parsed="true" data-format="number" data-ordinal_end="3" data-ordinal_start="3" data-id="heading_13330" data-content-heading-label="3. Interpretation of "Harm" in Section 18-3-203" id="heading_13330"><span data-paragraph-id="13330" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="13330" data-sentence-id="13330" class="ldml-sentence">3.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13330" data-sentence-id="13333" class="ldml-sentence">Interpretation of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Harm"</span> in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13333"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 18-3-203</span></a></span></span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="13377" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="13377" data-sentence-id="13378" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13378"><span class="ldml-cite">¶25</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">The statute</span> doesn't define the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> and the term hasn't acquired a technical or particularized meaning.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13377" data-sentence-id="13494" class="ldml-sentence">Therefore, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> must read <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> in context and construe it according to the rules of grammar and its common usage.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13377" data-sentence-id="13608" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13494"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 2-4-101, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2022</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13377" data-sentence-id="13634" class="ldml-sentence">To do so, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">we</span> may consider a definition in a recognized dictionary."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="13377" data-sentence-id="13703" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895595681" data-vids="895595681" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13634"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Cowen v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2018 CO 96</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13634"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:431p3d215,218"><span class="ldml-cite">
431 P.3d 215, 218</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13377" data-sentence-id="13757" class="ldml-sentence">Merriam-Webster defines <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to damage or injure physically or mentally."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="13377" data-sentence-id="13837" class="ldml-sentence">Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harm <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[https://perma.cc/AD26-WZLN]</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13377" data-sentence-id="13943" class="ldml-sentence">Thus, the term's common usage suggests more than just physical harm.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="14011" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="14011" data-sentence-id="14011" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14011"><span class="ldml-cite">¶26</span></a></span> And putting the term in context doesn't necessarily clarify its meaning.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14011" data-sentence-id="14088" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Harm"</span> is preceded by the terms <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="14011" data-sentence-id="14143" class="ldml-sentence">Some definitions of both terms suggest physicality.<a href="#note-fr5" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr5">5</a></span> <span data-paragraph-id="14011" data-sentence-id="14195" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i> Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https:// www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/<i class="ldml-italics">infect</i> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[https://perma.cc/27UK-BYGL]</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(providing the first definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect"</span> as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to contaminate with a disease-producing substance or agent <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(such as a bacteria)</span>"</span>)</span>; Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/ dictionary<i class="ldml-italics">/injure</i> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[https://perma.cc/NE23-GVNJ]</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(providing the first definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure"</span> as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to inflict bodily hurt on"</span>)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14011" data-sentence-id="14623" class="ldml-sentence">More modern definitions, however, surpass mere physicality.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14011" data-sentence-id="14683" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_14730,sentence_14623"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Infect,</i> Merriam-Webster Dictionary</span>, <span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">supra</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect"</span> as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to work upon or seize upon so as to induce sympathy, belief, or support,"</span> as in <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"trying to <i class="ldml-italics">infect</i> their salespeople with their enthusiasm"</span></span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_14936,sentence_14623"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Injure,</i> Merriam-Webster Dictionary</span>, <span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">supra</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure"</span> as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1218" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_14961"></span> harm, impair, or tarnish the standing of,"</span> as in <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<i class="ldml-italics">injured</i> his reputation"</span>; <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to give pain to,"</span> as in <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<i class="ldml-italics">injure</i> a person's pride"</span>; or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to do an injustice to"</span></span>)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="15117" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="15117" data-sentence-id="15118" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15118"><span class="ldml-cite">¶27</span></a></span> Thus, although physicality is one way <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> could have distinguished the intended effects listed in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15118"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span> —<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm"</span>—from those listed in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15118"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> to avoid violating Colorado's equal protection guarantee, <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>'s plain language doesn't clearly suggest that it did.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="15117" data-sentence-id="15460" class="ldml-sentence">Accordingly, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> agree with the division that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> as it appears in <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15460"><span class="ldml-cite">subsections 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span>, is ambiguous because it is susceptible of more than one reasonable interpretation, including physical, emotional, or psychological damage.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="15117" data-sentence-id="15710" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15460" data-refglobal="case:peoplevplemmons,2021coa10"><span class="ldml-refname">Plemmons</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15460"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 22</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">490 P.3d at 1118</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="15117" data-sentence-id="15749" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> therefore turn to extrinsic aids to guide our interpretation.</span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth4" data-specifier="a" data-value="a. Legislative History" data-parsed="true" data-format="lower_case_letters" data-ordinal_end="1" data-ordinal_start="1" data-id="heading_15813" data-content-heading-label="a. Legislative History" id="heading_15813"><span data-paragraph-id="15813" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="15813" data-sentence-id="15813" class="ldml-sentence"><b class="ldml-bold">a. Legislative History</b></span></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="15835" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="15835" data-sentence-id="15836" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15836"><span class="ldml-cite">¶28</span></a></span> Legislative history—<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"the development of <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> during the legislative process and prior to <span class="ldml-entity">enactment</span> or <span class="ldml-entity">amendment</span>,"</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15836" data-refglobal="case:colooilgasconservationcommnvmartinez,2019co3"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Colo. Oil & Gas Conservation Comm'n v. Martinez</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2019 CO 3</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15836"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 30</span></a></span></span> n.2, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891671070" data-vids="891671070" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15836"><span class="ldml-cite">
433 P.3d 22, 29 n.2</span></a></span> —can illuminate <span class="ldml-entity">legislative intent</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="15835" data-sentence-id="16085" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15836" data-refglobal="case:peoplevsprinkle,2021co60,489p3d1242"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Sprinkle</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2021 CO 60</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15836"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 22</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:peoplevsprinkle,2021co60,489p3d1242"><span class="ldml-cite">
489 P.3d 1242, 1246</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="16143" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="16143" data-sentence-id="16143" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16143"><span class="ldml-cite">¶29</span></a></span> In <span class="ldml-entity">1997</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> considered what is now <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16143"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span>, the provision classifying as second degree assault the intentional use of an individual's bodily fluids against a detention facility employee when that individual is lawfully confined in a detention facility.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16143" data-sentence-id="16430" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16430"><span class="ldml-cite">Ch. 270, sec. 1</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16430"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 18-3-203, 1997 Colo. Sess. Laws</span></a></span></span>, 1591, 1591-92.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="16496" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="16496" data-sentence-id="16496" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16496"><span class="ldml-cite">¶30</span></a></span> The committee's debate focused largely on the trauma caused by uninvited contact with another's bodily fluids.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16496" data-sentence-id="16611" class="ldml-sentence">Legislators made comparisons to physical afflictions in order to highlight the danger posed by these encounters.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16496" data-sentence-id="16724" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">Bill</span> sponsor Representative <span class="ldml-entity">Larry Schwarz</span> contended that intentionally exposing detention facility staff to potentially pathogenic bodily fluids <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(then a misdemeanor)</span> was worse than breaking a staff member's nose <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a felony)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16496" data-sentence-id="16948" class="ldml-sentence">Hearing on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">H.B. 1186</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-refname">H. Judiciary</span> <span class="ldml-cite">Comm., 61st Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">Feb. 4, 1997</span>)</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see also</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888925618" data-vids="888925618" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16948"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Vensor v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
151 P.3d 1274, 1279</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2007</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"While by no means conclusive, the testimony of <span class="ldml-entity">a bill</span>'s sponsor concerning its purpose and anticipated effect can be powerful evidence of <span class="ldml-entity">legislative intent</span>."</span></span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16496" data-sentence-id="17269" class="ldml-sentence">Representative <span class="ldml-entity">Stephen Tool</span> echoed this sentiment, noting that the impact of being spat on can be <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"so much worse than even a physical assault."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="16496" data-sentence-id="17413" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17269"><span class="ldml-refname">Hearing on H.B. 1186 before the H. Judiciary Comm.</span>, <span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">supra</i></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16496" data-sentence-id="17472" class="ldml-sentence">Such comparisons suggest that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s focus wasn't on the physical damage stemming from such assaults, but from the emotional or psychological toll of not knowing the extent of the damage for some time.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="17684" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="17684" data-sentence-id="17684" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17684"><span class="ldml-cite">¶31</span></a></span> Senator <span class="ldml-entity">Richard Mutzebaugh</span> explicitly observed that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> already appeared in the second-degree-assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17684" data-sentence-id="17815" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17684"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="17684" data-sentence-id="17819" class="ldml-sentence">In <span class="ldml-entity">1997</span>, as in the current <span class="ldml-entity">statutory scheme</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17819"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(e)</span></span></a></span> defined <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> to include <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"physical <i class="ldml-italics">or mental impairment."</i></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="17684" data-sentence-id="17946" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">Emphasis added</span>.)</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="17684" data-sentence-id="17964" class="ldml-sentence">Senator Mutzebaugh seems to have grounded <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17964"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">f.5</span></a></span>)</span></span>'s use of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17964"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(e)</span></span></a></span>'s definition, which expressly covered more than just physical harm.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17684" data-sentence-id="18131" class="ldml-sentence">Hearing on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">H.B. 1186</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18131"><span class="ldml-refname">H. Judiciary Comm.</span>, <span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">supra</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see, e.g.</span>, </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18131" data-refglobal="case:mcculleyvpeople,2020co40"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">McCulley v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2020 CO 40</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18131"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 32</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891593467" data-vids="891593467" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18131"><span class="ldml-cite">
463 P.3d 254, 261</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-relatingauthority">construing</span> the terms <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"conviction"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"convicted"</span> consistently throughout <span class="ldml-entity">section</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">16-22-113<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2022</span>)</span></a></span>'s various subsections</span>)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="18393" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="18393" data-sentence-id="18393" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18393"><span class="ldml-cite">¶32</span></a></span> Thus, upon this provision's adoption, legislators seemed to have accepted a definition for the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> that embraced more than just physical damage.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth4" data-specifier="b" data-value="b. Statutory History" data-parsed="true" data-format="lower_case_letters" data-ordinal_end="2" data-ordinal_start="2" data-id="heading_18549" data-content-heading-label="b. Statutory History" id="heading_18549"><span data-paragraph-id="18549" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="18549" data-sentence-id="18549" class="ldml-sentence"><b class="ldml-bold">b. Statutory History</b></span></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="18569" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="18569" data-sentence-id="18569" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18569"><span class="ldml-cite">¶33</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span>'ve also recognized that a provision's statutory history—the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"evolution of <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> as it is amended over time by <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>,"</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18569" data-refglobal="case:colooilgasconservationcommnvmartinez,2019co3"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Colo. Oil & Gas Conservation Comm'n</i></span></a></span> , <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18569"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 30</span></a></span></span> n.2, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891671070" data-vids="891671070" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18569"><span class="ldml-cite">
433 P.3d at29 n.2</span></a></span> —<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"informs our understanding of <span class="ldml-entity">legislative intent</span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="18569" data-sentence-id="18827" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891671070" data-vids="891671070" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18827"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18827"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 31</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891671070" data-vids="891671070" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18827"><span class="ldml-cite">
433 P.3d at30</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="18855" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="18855" data-sentence-id="18855" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18855"><span class="ldml-cite">¶34</span></a></span> In <span class="ldml-entity">2009</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> expanded the assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>'s protected personnel beyond the walls of detention facilities.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18855" data-sentence-id="18977" class="ldml-sentence">The new provision, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18977"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>, classified as misdemeanor third degree assault the same conduct prohibited in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection -203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span></span></a></span>, including a mirror recitation of <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1219" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_19159"></span> the intent element from the original provision—the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"intent to infect, injure, harm, harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm,"</span> perpetrated against peace officers, firefighters, or emergency medical technicians.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18855" data-sentence-id="19364" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18977"><span class="ldml-cite">Ch. 305, sec. 1</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18977"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 18-3-204</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18977"><span class="ldml-cite">
2009 Colo. Sess. Laws 1649, 1649-50</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18855" data-sentence-id="19430" class="ldml-sentence">And again, during a <span class="ldml-entity">House Judiciary Committee Hearing</span> on <span class="ldml-entity">the bill</span>, legislators' focus turned to the psychological trauma caused by this sort of assault.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18855" data-sentence-id="19583" class="ldml-sentence">Hearing on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">H.B. 1120</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-refname">H. Judiciary</span> <span class="ldml-cite">Comm., 67th Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">Jan. 29, 2009</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18855" data-sentence-id="19681" class="ldml-sentence">While the discussion referred to conduct amounting to third degree assault, this iteration of <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> included all the intended effects.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18855" data-sentence-id="19822" class="ldml-sentence">Therefore, again, legislators appear to have associated emotional trauma with the consequences this statutory text aims to prevent.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="19953" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="19953" data-sentence-id="19953" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19953"><span class="ldml-cite">¶35</span></a></span> And most recently, in <span class="ldml-entity">2015</span>, legislators increased the penalty for this conduct outside of detention facilities and bifurcated the intent element, resulting in the scheme <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> see today.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19953" data-sentence-id="20141" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19953"><span class="ldml-cite">Ch. 337, secs. 2-3</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19953"><span class="ldml-cite">§§ 18-3-203</span></a></span></span>, - 204, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
2015 Colo. Sess. Laws 1366, 1366-67</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="19953" data-sentence-id="20218" class="ldml-sentence">Echoing comments from the provision's legislative history, Senator <span class="ldml-entity">John Cooke</span>, one of the sponsors for the <span class="ldml-entity">2015</span> <span class="ldml-entity">bill</span>, introduced the text by explaining that forced contact with bodily fluids often does <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"more damage than ... physical damage because of the psychological damage"</span> of potentially <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"contracting a communicable disease."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="19953" data-sentence-id="20548" class="ldml-sentence">Hearing on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 67</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-refname">S. Judiciary</span> <span class="ldml-cite">Comm., 70th Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">Jan. 28, 2015</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="20643" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="20643" data-sentence-id="20643" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20643"><span class="ldml-cite">¶36</span></a></span> It was a last-minute, friendly <span class="ldml-entity">amendment</span> to the <span class="ldml-entity">2015</span> proposal that bifurcated the list of intended effects because of concerns of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"overstretch"</span>: that too much conduct would be classified as a felony. 2d Reading on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 67</span></a></span> before the H., <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">70th Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">May 4, 2015</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(statements of Reps. <span class="ldml-entity">Mike Foote</span> and <span class="ldml-entity">Yeulin Willett</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20643" data-sentence-id="20980" class="ldml-sentence">During a <span class="ldml-entity">House Judiciary Committee Hearing</span>, Representative Willett expressed concern with the original text of the proposed <span class="ldml-entity">amendment</span> because of the low bar for the intent to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="20643" data-sentence-id="21192" class="ldml-sentence">Hearing on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 67</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-refname">H. Judiciary</span> <span class="ldml-cite">Comm., 70th Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">Apr. 28, 2015</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20643" data-sentence-id="21288" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">He</span> reasoned, for example, that spitting on an officer's boots could meet this threshold.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20643" data-sentence-id="21377" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21288"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="20643" data-sentence-id="21381" class="ldml-sentence">While such conduct is likely disturbing, committee members seemed to agree that spitting on someone's boot shouldn't support a felony assault charge, akin to manslaughter and vehicular assault.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20643" data-sentence-id="21575" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21381"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(statements of Reps. Willet and <span class="ldml-entity">Joseph Salazar</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20643" data-sentence-id="21628" class="ldml-sentence">So, the legislators divided the list of intended effects between second and third degree assault, with <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"intent to infect, injure, or harm"</span> constituting felony second degree assault and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"intent to harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm"</span> constituting misdemeanor third degree assault. 2d Reading on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 67</span></a></span> before the H., <span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21628"><span class="ldml-cite">supra</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal">see also</span></i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21628"><span class="ldml-cite">§§ 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span>, <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span></span></a></span></span>-<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">b.5</span></a></span>)</span>, - <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="22009" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="22009" data-sentence-id="22009" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22009"><span class="ldml-cite">¶37</span></a></span> This division wasn't based on physicality, but rather on the <i class="ldml-italics">severity</i> of the intended consequences of the assault.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22009" data-sentence-id="22128" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The legislature</span> reaffirmed its objective: to prevent individuals from causing others to suffer physical or emotional damage by exposing them to bodily fluids.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22009" data-sentence-id="22287" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See, e.g.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_22355,sentence_22128"><span class="ldml-refname">Hearing on S.B. 67 before the H. Judiciary Comm.</span>, <span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">supra</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">statements of Reps. Willet; Salazar; and <span class="ldml-entity">Janak Joshi</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">bill</span> sponsor</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22009" data-sentence-id="22424" class="ldml-sentence">Legislators reasoned that these consequences emanated from, for example, being spat on in the face but not on the boots.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22009" data-sentence-id="22545" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22424"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(statements of Reps. Willet, Salazar, and Foote)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22009" data-sentence-id="22599" class="ldml-sentence">Thus, the legislative and statutory histories suggest that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> divided second and third degree assault based on the severity of the intended effects rather than along a physical-psychological divide.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth4" data-format="lower_case_letters" data-confidences="medium" data-ordinal_end="3" data-value="c. The Statutory Scheme and Context" data-parsed="true" data-types="backgroundlaw" data-specifier="c" data-ordinal_start="3" data-id="heading_22810" data-content-heading-label="c. The Statutory Scheme and Context" id="heading_22810"><span data-paragraph-id="22810" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="22810" data-sentence-id="22810" class="ldml-sentence"><b class="ldml-bold">c. <span class="ldml-entity">The Statutory Scheme</span> and Context</b></span></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="22845" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="22845" data-sentence-id="22845" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22845"><span class="ldml-cite">¶38</span></a></span> In <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22845"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> provided a list of proscribed intended effects: <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect, injure, or harm."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="22845" data-sentence-id="22967" class="ldml-sentence">To avoid rendering any word in that list superfluous, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> must assume <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> intended for each to have a different meaning.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22845" data-sentence-id="23099" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895668608" data-vids="895668608" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22967"><span class="ldml-refname">Rediger</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22967"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 22</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895668608" data-vids="895668608" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_23130"><span class="ldml-cite">
416 P.3d at899</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[T]</span>he use of different terms signals an intent on the part of the General Assembly to afford those terms different meanings."</span></span> <span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891573222" data-vids="891573222" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Robinson v. Colo. State Lottery Div.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
179 P.3d 998, 1010</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2008</span>)</span></a></span> )</span>)</span></span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="23340" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="23340" data-sentence-id="23340" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23340"><span class="ldml-cite">¶39</span></a></span> As noted above, Merriam-Webster defines <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect"</span> as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to contaminate with a disease-producing substance or agent <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(such as a bacteria)</span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="23340" data-sentence-id="23479" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23340"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Infect,</i> Merriam-Webster Dictionary</span>, <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1220" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_23515"></span> <span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">supra</i></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23340" data-sentence-id="23523" class="ldml-sentence">And it defines <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure"</span> as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to inflict bodily hurt on"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to do an injustice to."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="23340" data-sentence-id="23607" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23523"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Injure,</i> Merriam-Webster Dictionary</span>, <span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">supra</i></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23340" data-sentence-id="23650" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Harm"</span> should therefore be interpreted, to the extent reasonable, to encompass something more.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="23744" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="23744" data-sentence-id="23745" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23745"><span class="ldml-cite">¶40</span></a></span> In arguing that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> means strictly physical harm, Plemmons acknowledges that her construction renders the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> superfluous.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23744" data-sentence-id="23883" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">She</span> further recognizes that the canon against surplusage is a <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"time-honored <span class="ldml-entity">proposition</span>,"</span> but points out that <span class="ldml-entity">this court</span> has previously observed that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"the superfluity principle, like all canons of construction, is merely an interpretive aid, not an absolute rule."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="23744" data-sentence-id="24148" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23883" data-refglobal="case:benefieldvcolorepublicanpartybenefieldii,2014co57"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Benefield v. Colo. Republican Party</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2014 CO 57</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23883"><span class="ldml-cite">¶¶ 16–17</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/892704041" data-vids="892704041" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
329 P.3d 262, 267</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23744" data-sentence-id="24231" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">She</span> argues <span class="ldml-entity">statutory schemes</span> often contain redundancies and, if faced with the choice between a plain-text reading rendering a word superfluous and an interpretation giving each word meaning but muddying the clarity of <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">courts</span> should embrace the former.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23744" data-sentence-id="24495" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890932090" data-vids="890932090" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24231"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Barton v. U.S. Att'y Gen.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
904 F.3d 1294, 1301</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">11th Cir.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2018</span>)</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-cert"><i class="ldml-italics">aff'd</i></span> , <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24231" data-refglobal="case:bartonvbarr,590us—,—,n2,140sct1442,1446,206led2d6822020"><span class="ldml-cite">––– U.S. ––––</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
140 S. Ct. 1442, 1453-54</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
206 L.Ed.2d 682</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see also</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/885300570" data-vids="885300570" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_24747,sentence_24231"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Rimini St., Inc. v. Oracle USA, Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">––– U.S. ––––</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
139 S. Ct. 873, 881</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
203 L.Ed.2d 180</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2019</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"Sometimes the better overall reading of <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> contains some redundancy."</span></span>)</span></span></span><span data-paragraph-id="23744" data-sentence-id="24827" class="ldml-sentence">.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="24828" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="24828" data-sentence-id="24829" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24829"><span class="ldml-cite">¶41</span></a></span> Meanwhile, <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> makes efforts to avoid any equal protection problem that the division's judgment potentially creates.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="24828" data-sentence-id="24962" class="ldml-sentence">The only difference between the criminalized conduct of second and third degree assault in <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24962"><span class="ldml-cite">sections 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">and</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24962"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span></span></span>, respectively, is the intended effect of <span class="ldml-entity">the defendant</span>'s conduct; that is, <span class="ldml-entity">the defendant</span>'s subjective mental state.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="24828" data-sentence-id="25212" class="ldml-sentence">And <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"separate <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span> proscribing with different penalties what ostensibly might be different acts, but offering no intelligent standard for distinguishing the proscribed conduct, run afoul of equal protection under state constitutional doctrine."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="24828" data-sentence-id="25461" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25212" data-refglobal="case:peoplevlee,2020co81"><span class="ldml-refname">Lee</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25212"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895646552" data-vids="895646552" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">476 P.3d at 354</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888916884" data-vids="888916884" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Marcy</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
628 P.2d 69, 75</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1981</span>)</span></a></span>, <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-cert">superseded by <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 18-3-102<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(d)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1986</span>)</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="24828" data-sentence-id="25602" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The prosecution</span> argues that the definitions of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harass,"</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"annoy,"</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"threaten,"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"alarm"</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(the intended effects of third degree assault)</span> critically have one thing in common: <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> don't imply an intent to cause substantial—meaning long-term and reasonably serious—affliction.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="25876" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="25876" data-sentence-id="25876" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25876"><span class="ldml-cite">¶42</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">The prosecution</span> therefore urges <span class="ldml-entity">us</span> to read a threshold requirement into the language in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25876"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>: the impact on the peace officer must be a <i class="ldml-italics">substantial</i> affliction, either physical or psychological.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="25876" data-sentence-id="26084" class="ldml-sentence">This is essentially the interpretation the division adopted in concluding that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s use of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> in <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26084"><span class="ldml-cite">subsections 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span> evinces an intent to criminalize a particular <i class="ldml-italics">kind</i> of trauma inflicted upon peace officers: prolonged psychological or emotional harm that stems from the possibility that the officer has been infected by or could become a vector for disease.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="25876" data-sentence-id="26480" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26084" data-refglobal="case:peoplevplemmons,2021coa10"><span class="ldml-refname">Plemmons</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26084"><span class="ldml-cite">¶¶ 45</span></a></span></span>, 48, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_26524" data-refglobal="case:490p3d1112,1115"><span class="ldml-cite">490 P.3d at 1122</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">reasoning that <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span>'s definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> didn't blur the definition between second and third degree assault because harm for second degree assault <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"must necessarily be based <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘upon the danger of injury or infection from contact with bodily fluids’</span> "</span> and that the harm <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"must be more than <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘fleeting or minimal in nature’</span> "</span></span>)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="26858" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="26858" data-sentence-id="26859" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26859"><span class="ldml-cite">¶43</span></a></span> Like <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span>'s proposed use of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"substantial,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span>'s and the division's focus on less-fleeting harm serves the legislative objective <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> identified above.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26858" data-sentence-id="27036" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> conclude that it is <span class="ldml-entity">a defendant</span>'s intent to cause prolonged damage—whether physical, psychological, emotional, or some combination of all three—rather than temporary shock or minor discomfort that elevates identical conduct from a misdemeanor to a felony in this context.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26858" data-sentence-id="27311" class="ldml-sentence">This distinction avoids equal protection problems because it is <span class="ldml-quotation quote">" <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘sufficiently pragmatic’</span> to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘permit an intelligent and uniform application of the law.’</span> "</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="26858" data-sentence-id="27467" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_27311" data-refglobal="case:peoplevlee,2020co81"><span class="ldml-refname">Lee</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_27311"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895646552" data-vids="895646552" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">476 P.3d at 354</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888916884" data-vids="888916884" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Marcy</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">628 P.2d at 78</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span></p></div></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-specifier="4" data-value="4. Application to the Trial Court's Jury Instruction" data-parsed="true" data-format="number" data-ordinal_end="4" data-ordinal_start="4" data-id="heading_27532" data-content-heading-label="4. Application to the Trial Court's Jury Instruction" id="heading_27532"><span data-paragraph-id="27532" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="27532" data-sentence-id="27532" class="ldml-sentence">4.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27532" data-sentence-id="27535" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">Application to <span class="ldml-entity">the Trial Court</span>'s Jury Instruction</span></span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="27584" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="27584" data-sentence-id="27585" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_27585"><span class="ldml-cite">¶44</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> now turn to the jury instruction defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="27584" data-sentence-id="27642" class="ldml-sentence">As you'll recall, <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> defined <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> to encompass <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"psychological or emotional harm"</span> that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"can include ... 1. fear, 2. anxiety, 3. or other type of significant distress that is based upon <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1221" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_27841"></span> the danger of injury or infection from contact with ... bodily fluids."</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="27913" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="27913" data-sentence-id="27913" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_27913"><span class="ldml-cite">¶45</span></a></span> Critically, this instruction provided that psychological or emotional harm <i class="ldml-italics">can,</i> but <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(presumably)</span> need not, be based on fear of infection or injury.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27913" data-sentence-id="28065" class="ldml-sentence">So it could have led a reasonable juror to believe that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> encompasses <i class="ldml-italics">any</i> type of significant distress and that harm based on the fear of disease was merely one example of such distress.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27913" data-sentence-id="28257" class="ldml-sentence">In this context however, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> <i class="ldml-italics">must</i> flow from a very <i class="ldml-italics">particular</i> form of significant distress; namely, the fear of disease because of uninvited exposure to another's bodily fluids.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27913" data-sentence-id="28438" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The trial court</span> erred in allowing the jury to infer otherwise.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="28500" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="28500" data-sentence-id="28501" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_28501"><span class="ldml-cite">¶46</span></a></span> Because <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> misinstructed the jury on an element of the charged offenses, and because the issue was preserved, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> review that error for constitutional harmlessness.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="28500" data-sentence-id="28682" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895209211" data-vids="895209211" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_28501"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Griego v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
19 P.3d 1, 8</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2001</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/934099257" data-vids="934099257" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_28501"><span class="ldml-refname">Garcia</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_28501"><span class="ldml-cite">¶¶ 15</span></a></span></span>, 18, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_28764" data-refglobal="case:503p3d135,140"><span class="ldml-cite">503 P.3d at 140</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-relatingauthority">explaining</span> that, to safeguard the constitutional right of criminal <span class="ldml-entity">defendants</span> to be presumed innocent until a jury has found them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, <span class="ldml-entity">trial courts</span> are required to properly instruct juries on all elements of the charges against them</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="28500" data-sentence-id="29028" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"If there is even a <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘reasonable <i class="ldml-italics">possibility</i> that the error might have contributed to the conviction,’</span> <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> must reverse."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="28500" data-sentence-id="29148" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/934099257" data-vids="934099257" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29028"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Garcia</i></span></a></span> , <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29028"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 18</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:503p3d135,140"><span class="ldml-cite">503 P.3d at 140</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895257365" data-vids="895257365" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Hagos v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2012 CO 63</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 11</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895257365" data-vids="895257365" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
288 P.3d 116, 119</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="29243" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="29243" data-sentence-id="29243" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29243"><span class="ldml-cite">¶47</span></a></span> While <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span>'s <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> instruction applied to the charges under both subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">f.5</span></a></span>)</span> and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span>, the varying lists of intended effects in each render the instruction's impact distinguishable.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29243" data-sentence-id="29445" class="ldml-sentence">Thus, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> take each subsection in turn.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="29483" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="29483" data-sentence-id="29484" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29484"><span class="ldml-cite">¶48</span></a></span> First, subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">f.5</span></a></span>)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29483" data-sentence-id="29513" class="ldml-sentence">As you'll recall, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29513"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> retains the broad list of intended effects: <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"intent to infect, injure, harm, harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="29483" data-sentence-id="29672" class="ldml-sentence">To convict Plemmons of this charge, <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> wasn't constrained to proving that Plemmons intended to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> Paige.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29483" data-sentence-id="29794" class="ldml-sentence">And during closing arguments, <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> reminded the jury several times of the expanded list of intended effects under subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">f.5</span></a></span>)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span>, likely assuring that the jury kept these other intended effects in mind.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="30012" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="30012" data-sentence-id="30013" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30013"><span class="ldml-cite">¶49</span></a></span> Within the confines of the police vehicle, Plemmons intentionally spat on the side of Paige's face and the back of his head.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="30012" data-sentence-id="30142" class="ldml-sentence">This conduct, along with her string of insults—for example, threatening that Paige would be lucky if <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> and his family were alive in a month—reasonably evince an intent to harass,<a href="#note-fr6" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr6">6</a> annoy,<a href="#note-fr7" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr7">7</a> threaten,<a href="#note-fr8" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr8">8</a> or alarm.<a href="#note-fr9" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr9">9</a></span> </p><p data-paragraph-id="30349" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="30349" data-sentence-id="30349" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30349"><span class="ldml-cite">¶50</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> conclude that a reasonable jury could find Plemmons guilty under these less severe intended effects, and thus, the instructional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt with regard to Plemmons's second-degree-assault conviction under <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30349"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="30620" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="30620" data-sentence-id="30621" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30621"><span class="ldml-cite">¶51</span></a></span> Moving to <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30621"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> confront the question of whether Plemmons intended to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> the deputies.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="30728" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="30728" data-sentence-id="30728" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_30728"><span class="ldml-cite">¶52</span></a></span> Because the jury instruction didn't confine the jurors' deliberation to prolonged psychological and emotional distress stemming from potential infection, it invited juror speculation and could have led to their reliance on considerations outside the scope of the proscribed conduct.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="30728" data-sentence-id="31015" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> can't be confident beyond a reasonable doubt that the <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1222" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_31072"></span> erroneous instruction didn't contribute to the convictions.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="30728" data-sentence-id="31133" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/934099257" data-vids="934099257" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31015"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Garcia</i></span></a></span> , <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31015"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 18</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:503p3d135,140"><span class="ldml-cite">503 P.3d at 140</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="30728" data-sentence-id="31170" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> therefore vacate Plemmons's two convictions under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31170"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>.</span></p></div></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-confidences="very_high" data-ordinal_end="2" data-value="B. Sufficiency of the Evidence" data-parsed="true" data-types="evidencesufficiency" data-specifier="B" data-ordinal_start="2" data-id="heading_31246" data-content-heading-label="B. Sufficiency of the Evidence" id="heading_31246"><span data-paragraph-id="31246" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="31246" data-sentence-id="31246" class="ldml-sentence">B.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="31246" data-sentence-id="31249" class="ldml-sentence">Sufficiency of the Evidence</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="31276" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="31276" data-sentence-id="31277" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31277"><span class="ldml-cite">¶53</span></a></span> Plemmons also challenges her <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31277"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> convictions for lack of sufficient evidence.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="31276" data-sentence-id="31370" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[I]</span>f <span class="ldml-entity">a defendant</span> is entitled to reversal of her convictions on appeal due to insufficient evidence, the guarantees against double jeopardy in the United States and Colorado Constitutions may preclude retrial."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="31276" data-sentence-id="31581" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/892166477" data-vids="892166477" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31370"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">McDonald v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2021 CO 64</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31370"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 61</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:494p3d1123,1134"><span class="ldml-cite">
494 P.3d 1123, 1134</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891825758" data-vids="891825758" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Coahran</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2019 COA 6</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 40</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891825758" data-vids="891825758" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
436 P.3d 617, 626</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="31705" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="31705" data-sentence-id="31706" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31706"><span class="ldml-cite">¶54</span></a></span> While <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[d]</span>ouble jeopardy principles <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘prohibit<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ ]</span> a retrial where <span class="ldml-entity">an appellate court</span> reverses a conviction solely for lack of sufficient evidence to sustain the jury's verdict,’</span> "</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31706"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31706"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 62</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31706" data-refglobal="case:494p3d1123,1134"><span class="ldml-cite">494 P.3d at 1134</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">second <span class="ldml-referencenote">alteration in original</span></span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886943198" data-vids="886943198" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31706"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Brassfield</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
652 P.2d 588, 594 n.5</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1982</span>)</span></a></span> )</span></span>, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"the government is not precluded from <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘retrying <span class="ldml-entity">a defendant</span> whose conviction is set aside because of an <i class="ldml-italics">error in the proceedings</i> leading to conviction,’</span> "</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31706" data-refglobal="case:494p3d1123,1134"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31706"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 63</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31706" data-refglobal="case:494p3d1123,1134"><span class="ldml-cite">494 P.3d at 1134</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/885959494" data-vids="885959494" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_31706"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Burks v. United States</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
437 U.S. 1, 14</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
98 S.Ct. 2141</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
57 L.Ed.2d 1</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1978</span>)</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="31705" data-sentence-id="32292" class="ldml-sentence">This is because <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"reversal for trial error, as distinguished from evidentiary insufficiency, does not constitute a decision to the effect that the government has failed to prove its case,"</span> but rather <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"it is a determination that <span class="ldml-entity">a defendant</span> has been convicted through a judicial process which is defective in some fundamental respect, <i class="ldml-italics">e. g.,</i> ... incorrect instructions."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="31705" data-sentence-id="32661" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/885959494" data-vids="885959494" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32292"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Burks</i></span> , <span class="ldml-cite">
437 U.S. at15</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
98 S.Ct. 2141</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see</span> </i> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/934099257" data-vids="934099257" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32292"><span class="ldml-refname">Garcia</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32292"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 1</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_32736" data-refglobal="case:503p3d135,140"><span class="ldml-cite">503 P.3d at 138</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-relatingauthority">remanding</span> for a new trial where <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> misinstructed the jury on an element of the charge</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887593782" data-vids="887593782" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Castillo v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2018 CO 62</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 66</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_32896" data-refglobal="case:421p3d1141,1152"><span class="ldml-cite">
421 P.3d 1141, 1152</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-relatingauthority">remanding</span> for a new trial where <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> erroneously gave superfluous jury instructions</span>)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="32992" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="32992" data-sentence-id="32993" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32993"><span class="ldml-cite">¶55</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"decline to speculate on whether a properly instructed jury would have found that <span class="ldml-entity">the prosecution</span> met its burden of proof"</span> for <span class="ldml-entity">the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32993"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> charges</span> levied against Plemmons.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="32992" data-sentence-id="33187" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/892166477" data-vids="892166477" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32993"><span class="ldml-refname">McDonald</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_32993"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 67</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:494p3d1123,1134"><span class="ldml-cite">494 P.3d at 1135</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="32992" data-sentence-id="33226" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[W]</span>hether or not the Government will be able to carry its burden of proof on retrial, the fact remains that retrial is the Government's first <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘bite at the apple’</span> to prove its case under the correct legal standard."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="32992" data-sentence-id="33442" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33226" data-refglobal="case:494p3d1123,1134"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/889677626" data-vids="889677626" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33226"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">United States v. Harrington</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
997 F.3d 812, 818</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">8th Cir.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2021</span>)</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span></p></div></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-confidences="very_high" data-ordinal_end="3" data-value="III. Conclusion" data-parsed="true" data-types="conclusion" data-specifier="III" data-ordinal_start="3" data-id="heading_33520" data-content-heading-label="III. Conclusion" id="heading_33520"><span data-paragraph-id="33520" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="33520" data-sentence-id="33520" class="ldml-sentence">III.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="33520" data-sentence-id="33525" class="ldml-sentence">Conclusion</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="33535" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="33535" data-sentence-id="33535" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33535"><span class="ldml-cite">¶56</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> affirm in part and reverse in part the division's judgment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="33535" data-sentence-id="33602" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> affirm Plemmons's conviction under <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33602"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span>, vacate her two convictions under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33602"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>, and remand <span class="ldml-entity">the case</span> for a new trial on those charges.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="33776" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="33776" data-sentence-id="33776" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity">GABRIEL</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">joined by JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity">MÁRQUEZ</span></span>, concurring in the judgment.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="33847" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="33847" data-sentence-id="33847" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33847"><span class="ldml-cite">¶57</span></a></span> The majority concludes that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> as that word is used in <span class="ldml-entity">sections</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2022</span>)</span></a></span>, means <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"prolonged psychological or emotional harm that stems from the possibility that an officer has been infected by or could become a vector for disease."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="33847" data-sentence-id="34132" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_33847"><span class="ldml-cite">Maj. op. ¶ 3</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="33847" data-sentence-id="34146" class="ldml-sentence">The majority further concludes that because <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span>'s jury instruction defining the meaning of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> did not accurately convey the meaning of that term, the judgments of conviction must be reversed.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="33847" data-sentence-id="34354" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_34146"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="34357" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="34357" data-sentence-id="34357" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_34357"><span class="ldml-cite">¶58</span></a></span> Although I agree that the definitional instruction given by <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> was reversible error, I cannot agree with the definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> that the majority adopts.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34357" data-sentence-id="34530" class="ldml-sentence">That definition finds no support in the text of <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_34530"><span class="ldml-cite">sections 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> or <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>, particularly to the extent that the majority adds to the statutory text a durational element of the intended harm <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(i.e., <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"prolonged"</span>)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34357" data-sentence-id="34761" class="ldml-sentence">In addition, although the majority suggests that the definition that it adopts is true to <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s concern for the effect on the victim, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">see</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">Maj. op. ¶¶ 3, 30</span></a></span></span>, in the actual statutory text, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> concerns the actor's mens rea, not the effect on the victim.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="34357" data-sentence-id="35028" class="ldml-sentence">And in my view, the majority's definition exposes these provisions to multiple constitutional challenges.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="35133" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="35133" data-sentence-id="35133" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_35133"><span class="ldml-cite">¶59</span></a></span> Accordingly, I cannot subscribe to the definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> that the majority adopts, and therefore I respectfully concur in the judgment, only.<span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1223" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_35281"></span></span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-confidences="very_high" data-ordinal_end="1" data-value="I. Factual Background" data-parsed="true" data-types="background" data-specifier="I" data-ordinal_start="1" data-id="heading_35281" data-content-heading-label=" I. Factual Background" id="heading_35281"><span data-paragraph-id="35281" class="ldml-paragraph "> <b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="35281" data-sentence-id="35282" class="ldml-sentence">I.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35281" data-sentence-id="35285" class="ldml-sentence">Factual Background</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="35303" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="35303" data-sentence-id="35303" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_35303"><span class="ldml-cite">¶60</span></a></span> I agree with the majority's recitation of the pertinent facts and will not repeat all of those facts here.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35303" data-sentence-id="35414" class="ldml-sentence">Because it is relevant to my analysis of the sufficiency of the evidence in <span class="ldml-entity">this case</span>, however, I briefly note the following evidence relating to Plemmons's mental state when <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> spat on Deputies Blakely and Paige.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="35628" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="35628" data-sentence-id="35628" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_35628"><span class="ldml-cite">¶61</span></a></span> It is undisputed that on the evening at issue, Plemmons called a friend and told the friend that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> was going to kill herself that night.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35628" data-sentence-id="35771" class="ldml-sentence">Deputies Blakley and Paige responded to Plemmons's home after the police received an anonymous call about a suicidal woman.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="35894" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="35894" data-sentence-id="35894" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_35894"><span class="ldml-cite">¶62</span></a></span> Upon their arrival, the deputies found Plemmons to be highly agitated, and <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> appeared to them to be intoxicated.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35894" data-sentence-id="36013" class="ldml-sentence">As <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> entered her home, <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> immediately began yelling and swearing at them.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35894" data-sentence-id="36091" class="ldml-sentence">For her part, Plemmons said that when <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> saw the deputies, <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> became <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"instantly terrified"</span> because her worst fear was going to jail.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="35894" data-sentence-id="36226" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">She</span> thus repeatedly asked the deputies to leave.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="36274" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="36274" data-sentence-id="36274" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36274"><span class="ldml-cite">¶63</span></a></span> Ultimately, Plemmons engaged in conversation with the deputies.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36274" data-sentence-id="36342" class="ldml-sentence">According to the deputies, when one of them asked Plemmons how <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> was planning to kill herself, <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> pointed to her open oven and said that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> might kill herself with carbon monoxide.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36274" data-sentence-id="36527" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">She</span> also said that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> might just slit her throat, at which point <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> picked up a small penknife.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36274" data-sentence-id="36625" class="ldml-sentence">The deputies reacted defensively to this, and Plemmons flung the knife across the room.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36274" data-sentence-id="36713" class="ldml-sentence">The deputies then placed Plemmons in protective custody and handcuffed her, which caused her to become highly agitated once more.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="36842" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="36842" data-sentence-id="36842" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_36842"><span class="ldml-cite">¶64</span></a></span> Before transporting Plemmons in the cold weather, the deputies located a coat and boots for her and began to dress her.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36842" data-sentence-id="36966" class="ldml-sentence">While <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> were doing so, Plemmons spat in Deputy Blakley's face and allegedly spat in Deputy Paige's face, as well.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36842" data-sentence-id="37083" class="ldml-sentence">At that point, the deputies told Plemmons that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> would be charged with assault on a police officer, and the protective custody became an arrest.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="36842" data-sentence-id="37230" class="ldml-sentence">The deputies then placed Plemmons in Deputy Paige's marked patrol car for transport to Mercy Medical Center.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="37338" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="37338" data-sentence-id="37338" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_37338"><span class="ldml-cite">¶65</span></a></span> During the drive to the medical center, Plemmons yelled insults and spat on Deputy Paige, at which point the deputy put a spit hood over Plemmons's head.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="37338" data-sentence-id="37496" class="ldml-sentence">While in the car, Plemmons told Deputy Paige that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> hated him, and <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> made a number of religiously themed comments, including telling the deputy to repent, that God was going to take him out, that his wife did not deserve to die from his sins, and that <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> would be <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"going to Hell, like next week."</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="37796" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="37796" data-sentence-id="37796" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_37796"><span class="ldml-cite">¶66</span></a></span> Plemmons was subsequently cleared at the medical center, and <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> was transported to the jail and later charged with, as pertinent here, two counts of second degree assault under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_37796"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> for spitting on the deputies while <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> were in her home and one count of second degree assault under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span></span></a></span> for spitting on Deputy Paige in the patrol car.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="38170" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="38170" data-sentence-id="38170" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_38170"><span class="ldml-cite">¶67</span></a></span> It appears undisputed that Plemmons had no infectious diseases at the time of the incident at issue, and <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> consistently and repeatedly denied that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> had any intent to injure or harm either of the deputies.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="38170" data-sentence-id="38384" class="ldml-sentence">Rather, <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> said that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> was just hoping to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"cause them to stop and think about what <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> were doing."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="38170" data-sentence-id="38488" class="ldml-sentence">As <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> put it, her message was, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[P]</span>lease don't hurt me, please don't take me to jail, how can this be happening to someone who's suicidal."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="38170" data-sentence-id="38629" class="ldml-sentence">No witness testified to the contrary, and neither Deputy Blakley nor Deputy Paige testified that <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> had concerns for his own health, either long-term or short-term.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="38793" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="38793" data-sentence-id="38793" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_38793"><span class="ldml-cite">¶68</span></a></span> At oral argument, <span class="ldml-entity">the People</span> conceded that if <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> within the meaning of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_38793"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>, were defined in terms of physical harm, as Plemmons suggests it should be, then no evidence would support Plemmons's convictions under that provision.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-confidences="very_high" data-ordinal_end="2" data-value="II. Analysis" data-parsed="true" data-types="analysis" data-specifier="II" data-ordinal_start="2" data-id="heading_39047" data-content-heading-label="II. Analysis" id="heading_39047"><span data-paragraph-id="39047" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="39047" data-sentence-id="39047" class="ldml-sentence">II.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39047" data-sentence-id="39051" class="ldml-sentence">Analysis</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="39059" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="39059" data-sentence-id="39059" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_39059"><span class="ldml-cite">¶69</span></a></span> I begin by discussing the applicable standards of review and principles of statutory interpretation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39059" data-sentence-id="39164" class="ldml-sentence">I then proceed to discuss the definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> that the majority adopts, explaining why I believe it to be unfounded and constitutionally unsound.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39059" data-sentence-id="39315" class="ldml-sentence">Next, I discuss what I believe to be a more appropriate <span class="ldml-entity">interpretation of <span class="ldml-entity">sections</span></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39059" data-sentence-id="39438" class="ldml-sentence">I end with a <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1224" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_39451"></span> respectful call for <span class="ldml-entity">legislative action</span> to address the multiple constitutional problems posed by these provisions.</span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-specifier="A" data-value="A. Standard of Review and Principles of Statutory Interpretation" data-parsed="true" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-ordinal_end="1" data-ordinal_start="1" data-id="heading_39565" data-content-heading-label="A. Standard of Review and Principles of Statutory Interpretation" id="heading_39565"><span data-paragraph-id="39565" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="39565" data-sentence-id="39565" class="ldml-sentence">A.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39565" data-sentence-id="39568" class="ldml-sentence">Standard of Review and Principles of Statutory Interpretation</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="39629" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="39629" data-sentence-id="39629" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_39629"><span class="ldml-cite">¶70</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> review issues of statutory interpretation de novo.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39629" data-sentence-id="39687" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_39629"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">McCoy v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2019 CO 44</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_39629"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 37</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
442 P.3d 379, 389</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="39740" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="39740" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_39740"><span class="ldml-cite">¶71</span></a></span> In construing <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> seek to ascertain and give effect to the General Assembly's intent.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="39840" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_39740"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="39844" class="ldml-sentence">To do so, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> look first to the statutory language, giving its words and phrases their plain and ordinary meanings.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="39959" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_39844"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="39963" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> read such words and phrases in context, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> construe them according to the rules of grammar and common usage.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="40079" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_39963"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="40083" class="ldml-sentence">Additionally, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"endeavor to effectuate the purpose of the legislative scheme."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="40164" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40164"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40164"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 38</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40164"><span class="ldml-cite">
442 P.3d at389</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="40194" class="ldml-sentence">In doing so, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> read that scheme as a whole, giving consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect to all of its parts, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> avoid constructions that would render any words or phrases superfluous or lead to illogical or absurd results.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="40429" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40194"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="40433" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> do not add words to <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> or subtract words from it.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="39740" data-sentence-id="40493" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886350092" data-vids="886350092" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40433"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Turbyne v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
151 P.3d 563, 567</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2007</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="40543" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="40543" data-sentence-id="40543" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40543"><span class="ldml-cite">¶72</span></a></span> If <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> is unambiguous, then <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> apply it as written.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="40543" data-sentence-id="40607" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40543"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">McCoy</i></span></a></span> , <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40543"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 38</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
442 P.3d at389</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="40543" data-sentence-id="40638" class="ldml-sentence">If <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> is ambiguous, however, then <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> may consider other aids to statutory construction, including the consequences of a given construction, the end to be achieved by <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>, and <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>'s statutory and legislative history.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="40543" data-sentence-id="40879" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40638"><span class="ldml-cite">id.</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal">see also</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40638" data-refglobal="case:colooilgasconservationcommnvmartinez,2019co3"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Colo. Oil & Gas Conservation Comm'n v. Martinez</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2019 CO 3</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_40638"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 30</span></a></span></span> & n.2, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/891671070" data-vids="891671070" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_40994"><span class="ldml-cite">
433 P.3d 22, 29 & n.2</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence"><span class="ldml-relatingauthority">noting</span> that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"statutory history"</span> refers to <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>'s evolution as it is amended over time by <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>, whereas <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"legislative history"</span> refers to <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>'s development during the legislative process</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="40543" data-sentence-id="41202" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> may also consider principles of construction such as <i class="ldml-italics">ejusdem generis,</i> which provides that when general terms follow a list of items in <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"the general terms are applied only to those things of the same general kind or class as those specifically mentioned."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="40543" data-sentence-id="41471" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/889251463" data-vids="889251463" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_41202"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Winter v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
126 P.3d 192, 195</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2006</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="40543" data-sentence-id="41521" class="ldml-sentence">And <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> may apply the doctrine of constitutional avoidance, under which <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> endeavor to interpret ambiguous <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span> so as to avoid rendering them unconstitutional.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="40543" data-sentence-id="41684" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_41684" data-refglobal="case:peoplevross,2021co9"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Ross</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2021 CO 9</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_41684"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 35</span></a></span></span> & n.6, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890251622" data-vids="890251622" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_41684"><span class="ldml-cite">
479 P.3d 910, 917 & n.6</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="41747" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="41747" data-sentence-id="41747" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_41747"><span class="ldml-cite">¶73</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"A <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> is ambiguous when it is reasonably susceptible of multiple interpretations."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="41747" data-sentence-id="41839" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_41747"><span class="ldml-refname">McCoy</span></a></span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_41747"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 38</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/890326998" data-vids="890326998" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
442 P.3d at389</span></a></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-specifier="B" data-value="B. Majority's Interpretation of "Harm"" data-parsed="true" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-ordinal_end="2" data-ordinal_start="2" data-id="heading_41868" data-content-heading-label="B. Majority's Interpretation of "Harm"" id="heading_41868"><span data-paragraph-id="41868" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="41868" data-sentence-id="41868" class="ldml-sentence">B.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="41868" data-sentence-id="41871" class="ldml-sentence">Majority's Interpretation of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Harm"</span></span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="41906" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="41906" data-sentence-id="41906" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_41906"><span class="ldml-cite">¶74</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_41906"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span> provides, in pertinent part, that a person commits second degree assault if:</span></p><div class="ldml-embeddeddocument"><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_42006" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="42006" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">f.5</span></a></span>)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> While lawfully confined in a detention facility within this state, a person <i class="ldml-italics">with intent to infect, injure, harm, harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm</i> a person in a detention facility whom the actor knows or reasonably should know to be an employee of a detention facility, causes such employee to come into contact with blood, seminal fluid, urine, feces, saliva, mucus, vomit, or any toxic, caustic, or hazardous material by any means, including but not limited to throwing, tossing, or expelling such fluid or material.</span></blockquote><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_42533" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="42533" class="ldml-sentence">....</span></blockquote><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_42537" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="42537" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span> <i class="ldml-italics">With intent to infect, injure, or harm</i> another person whom the actor knows or reasonably should know to be engaged in the performance of his or her duties as a peace officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical care provider, or an emergency medical service provider, <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> or <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> causes such person to come into contact with blood, seminal fluid, urine, feces, saliva, mucus, vomit, or any toxic, caustic, or hazardous material by any means, including by throwing, tossing, or expelling such fluid or material<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[.]</span></span></blockquote></div><p data-paragraph-id="43051" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="43051" data-sentence-id="43051" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">Emphases added</span>.)</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="43068" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="43068" data-sentence-id="43068" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_43068"><span class="ldml-cite">¶75</span></a></span> I agree with the majority's determination that the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> as it is used in these provisions, is ambiguous.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="43068" data-sentence-id="43185" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_43068"><span class="ldml-cite">Maj. op. ¶ 27</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="43068" data-sentence-id="43204" class="ldml-sentence">As a result, I further agree that <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> may look to the above-noted aids to statutory construction.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="43068" data-sentence-id="43301" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_43204"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="43068" data-sentence-id="43305" class="ldml-sentence">In my view, however, none of these tools of construction supports the majority's conclusion that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> means <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"prolonged psychological or emotional harm that stems from the possibility that an officer <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1225" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_43506"></span> has been infected by or could become a vector for disease."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="43068" data-sentence-id="43567" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_43305"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">at ¶ 3</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="43578" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="43578" data-sentence-id="43578" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_43578"><span class="ldml-cite">¶76</span></a></span> As an initial matter, I note that nothing in the text of <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_43578"><span class="ldml-cite">sections 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> or <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> says anything about the duration of any harm, much less that the harm must be <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"prolonged."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="43578" data-sentence-id="43777" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_43578"><span class="ldml-cite">Maj. op. ¶ 3</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="43578" data-sentence-id="43795" class="ldml-sentence">Nor do these provisions criminalize causing a particular effect on a peace officer or other victim, which appears to be the focus of the majority's construction.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="43578" data-sentence-id="43957" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_43795"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">at ¶¶ 3, 30</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="43578" data-sentence-id="43979" class="ldml-sentence">Instead, the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> as used in these provisions, refers solely to the <i class="ldml-italics">actor's</i> mens rea <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(i.e., the intent to infect, injure, or harm)</span>, not to the impact on the victim of the actor's conduct.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="43578" data-sentence-id="44175" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_43979"><span class="ldml-cite">§§ 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span>, <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="44207" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="44207" data-sentence-id="44207" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_44207"><span class="ldml-cite">¶77</span></a></span> In addition, in my view, the majority's interpretation finds no support in the statutory or legislative history of these provisions.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="44207" data-sentence-id="44344" class="ldml-sentence">Before <span class="ldml-entity">2015</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_44344"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span> provided that a person committed the crime of third degree <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(misdemeanor)</span> assault if the person, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"with intent to infect, injure, harm, harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm"</span> someone whom the actor knew or reasonably should have known to be a peace officer, caused the officer to come into contact with saliva or other bodily fluids.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="44207" data-sentence-id="44708" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_44344"><span class="ldml-cite">Ch. 337, sec. 3</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_44344"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_44344"><span class="ldml-cite">
2015 Colo. Sess. Laws 1366, 1367</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="44207" data-sentence-id="44777" class="ldml-sentence">In <span class="ldml-entity">2015</span>, the General Assembly removed the terms <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect,"</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure,"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> from the third degree assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> and added them to a new subsection of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_44777"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203</span></a></span>, which defined second degree <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(felony)</span> assault.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="44207" data-sentence-id="44996" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_44777"><span class="ldml-cite">Ch. 337, sec. 2</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_44777"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_44777"><span class="ldml-cite">
2015 Colo. Sess. Laws 1366, 1366-67</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="44207" data-sentence-id="45068" class="ldml-sentence">Under the new provision, which is the principal subsection now before <span class="ldml-entity">us</span>, a person commits second degree assault if, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[w]</span>ith intent to infect, injure, or harm"</span> another whom the actor knows or reasonably should know to be a peace officer, the person causes the peace officer to come into contact with saliva or other bodily fluids.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="44207" data-sentence-id="45399" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_45068"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 18-3-203<span class="ldml-headnoteanchor"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="45416" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="45416" data-sentence-id="45416" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_45416"><span class="ldml-cite">¶78</span></a></span> Although an earlier draft of <span class="ldml-entity">the bill</span> that amended the above-quoted <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span> would have reclassified as a felony <i class="ldml-italics">any</i> spitting on a peace officer with the intent to injure, infect, harm, harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 15-067, 70th Gen. Assemb., 1st Reg. Sess. <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(Colo. 2015)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(as introduced in Senate, <span class="ldml-entity">Jan. 14, 2015</span>)</span></span>, legislators accepted <span class="ldml-entity">amendments</span> on the House floor intended to prevent <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"over-reaching"</span> and making conduct such as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"spitting on the boots"</span> of an emergency responder a felony, 2nd Reading on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 15-067</span></a></span> before the H., <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">70th Gen. Assemb., 1st Reg. Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">May 4, 2015</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="46007" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="46007" data-sentence-id="46007" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_46007"><span class="ldml-cite">¶79</span></a></span> In splitting the original third degree assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> and increasing the severity of the punishment for, among other things, spitting on a peace officer with the intent to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect, injure, or harm,"</span> Senator <span class="ldml-entity">John Cooke</span>, one of <span class="ldml-entity">the bill</span>'s co-sponsors, explained that his intent was to account for the psychological trauma that could arise from unwanted contact with bodily fluids.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="46007" data-sentence-id="46391" class="ldml-sentence">As <span class="ldml-entity">he</span> explained, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[T]</span>he reason that I felt that <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[accounting for emotional or psychological harm]</span> was important is because, a lot of times that has more damage than the physical ... damage, because of the ... psychological damage of ... later on, you could be contracting a communicable disease."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="46007" data-sentence-id="46687" class="ldml-sentence">Hearings on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 15-067</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-refname">S. Judiciary</span> <span class="ldml-cite">Comm., 70th Gen. Assemb., 1st Reg. Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">Jan. 28, 2015</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="46792" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="46792" data-sentence-id="46792" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_46792"><span class="ldml-cite">¶80</span></a></span> Nothing in this statutory or legislative history suggests a concern for <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"prolonged"</span> harm.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="46792" data-sentence-id="46886" class="ldml-sentence">Rather, the legislators' comments suggest a desire to punish an offender more severely for intending to cause a peace officer psychological trauma <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-signal">e.g.</span>, fear of contracting a communicable disease)</span> as a result of coming into contact with bodily fluids than for acting with the intent to cause lesser annoyances <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-signal">e.g.</span>, the annoyance caused by a person's spitting on the officer's boots)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="46792" data-sentence-id="47273" class="ldml-sentence">But even assuming <span class="ldml-entity">a legislative intent</span> to address either <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"prolonged"</span> harm or the effect of an actor's conduct on a peace officer, <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> that <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> enacted does not actually address these purported concerns.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="46792" data-sentence-id="47496" class="ldml-sentence">As noted above, nothing in <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_47496"><span class="ldml-cite">sections 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> or <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> incorporates the notion of causing psychological trauma based on contact with bodily fluids.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="46792" data-sentence-id="47663" class="ldml-sentence">Indeed, the only reference to causation in <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> relates to causing a peace officer or a detention facility employee to come into contact with the actor's bodily fluids.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="46792" data-sentence-id="47839" class="ldml-sentence">And to the extent that the word <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> is used, it is used in the context of describing the actor's mens rea, not any effect on the victim.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="46792" data-sentence-id="47979" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> are, of course, not at <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1226" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_48005"></span> liberty to rewrite <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> in order to accomplish what <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> might believe <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span> was seeking to achieve but did not actually enact.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="46792" data-sentence-id="48147" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886350092" data-vids="886350092" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_47979"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Turbyne</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">151 P.3d at 567</span></a></span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="48177" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="48177" data-sentence-id="48177" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_48177"><span class="ldml-cite">¶81</span></a></span> Lastly, in my view, the majority's interpretation creates a number of constitutional infirmities.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="48278" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="48278" data-sentence-id="48278" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_48278"><span class="ldml-cite">¶82</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> have recognized that <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> is unconstitutionally vague and therefore void when it <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that persons of ordinary intelligence must necessarily guess as to its meaning and differ as to its application."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="48278" data-sentence-id="48544" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887797537" data-vids="887797537" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_48278"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Becker</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
759 P.2d 26, 31</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1988</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="48591" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="48591" data-sentence-id="48591" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_48591"><span class="ldml-cite">¶83</span></a></span> In addition, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> have long observed that Colorado's equal protection guarantee is violated when two criminal <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span> proscribe identical conduct, yet one punishes that conduct more harshly.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="48591" data-sentence-id="48785" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_48591" data-refglobal="case:peoplevlee,2020co81"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Lee</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2020 CO 81</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_48591"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895646552" data-vids="895646552" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
476 P.3d 351, 354</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="48591" data-sentence-id="48837" class="ldml-sentence">Along the same lines, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> have said that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"separate <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span> proscribing with different penalties what ostensibly might be different acts, but offering no intelligent standard for distinguishing the proscribed conduct, run afoul of equal protection under state constitutional doctrine."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="48591" data-sentence-id="49122" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888916884" data-vids="888916884" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_48837"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Marcy</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
628 P.2d 69, 75</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1981</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="48591" data-sentence-id="49169" class="ldml-sentence">Thus, to overcome an equal protection challenge to <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span>, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"the statutory classification must turn on <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘reasonably intelligible standards of criminal culpability,’</span> and any definition of a crime must be <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘sufficiently coherent and discrete that a person of average intelligence can reasonably distinguish it from conduct proscribed by other offenses.’</span> "</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="48591" data-sentence-id="49523" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_49169" data-refglobal="case:peoplevgriego,2018co5"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Griego</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2018 CO 5</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_49169"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 36</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888782645" data-vids="888782645" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">
409 P.3d 338, 344</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888916884" data-vids="888916884" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Marcy</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">628 P.2d at 80-81</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="49612" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="49612" data-sentence-id="49612" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_49612"><span class="ldml-cite">¶84</span></a></span> Here, the definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> that the majority adopts creates substantial vagueness and equal protection problems.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="49612" data-sentence-id="49733" class="ldml-sentence">As to the former, the majority provides no guidance as to what <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"prolonged"</span> means in this context, nor is it at all clear how <span class="ldml-entity">a prosecutor</span> or fact-finder would be able to discern when <span class="ldml-entity">a defendant</span> intended prolonged harm, as opposed to harm of a non-prolonged nature.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="49612" data-sentence-id="49999" class="ldml-sentence">And regarding equal protection, the majority's definition creates substantial overlap between second degree assault <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a felony)</span> under <span class="ldml-entity">sections</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>, which the majority construes as subsuming spitting on a peace officer with the intent to cause prolonged emotional harm, and third degree assault <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a misdemeanor)</span> under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_49999"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>, which makes it a crime to spit on a peace officer with the intent to, among other things, threaten or alarm the officer.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="49612" data-sentence-id="50494" class="ldml-sentence">Accordingly, in my view, the majority's definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> is not sufficiently coherent and discrete to allow a person of average intelligence to be able to distinguish the conduct proscribed by the second degree assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> from that proscribed by the third degree assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="49612" data-sentence-id="50783" class="ldml-sentence">As a result, the majority's definition affords prosecutors substantial discretion to charge the very same conduct as either a felony or a misdemeanor, with no discernible standard for distinguishing one from the other, in violation of the equal protection principles set forth above.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="51066" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="51066" data-sentence-id="51066" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_51066"><span class="ldml-cite">¶85</span></a></span> For all of these reasons, I cannot subscribe to the definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> that the majority adopts today.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-specifier="C" data-value="C. A More Well-Founded Interpretation of "Harm"" data-parsed="true" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-ordinal_end="3" data-ordinal_start="3" data-id="heading_51174" data-content-heading-label="C. A More Well-Founded Interpretation of "Harm"" id="heading_51174"><span data-paragraph-id="51174" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="51174" data-sentence-id="51174" class="ldml-sentence">C.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="51174" data-sentence-id="51177" class="ldml-sentence">A More Well-Founded Interpretation of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Harm"</span></span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="51221" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="51221" data-sentence-id="51221" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_51221"><span class="ldml-cite">¶86</span></a></span> This, of course, leaves the question of what <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> means for purposes of the second degree assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="51221" data-sentence-id="51334" class="ldml-sentence">Although, for the reasons that the majority states <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(and that I note above)</span>, the statutory language is ambiguous, I believe that the text and the applicable tools of statutory construction support the interpretation proffered by Plemmons, namely, that second degree assault under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_51334"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> criminalizes spitting on peace officers with the intent to cause physical harm, whereas third degree assault criminalizes doing so with the intent to cause emotional or psychological harm.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="51221" data-sentence-id="51825" class="ldml-sentence">I reach this conclusion for several reasons.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="51869" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="51869" data-sentence-id="51869" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_51869"><span class="ldml-cite">¶87</span></a></span> First, this interpretation is supported by the statutory text, particularly when <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_51869"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> is construed together with <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_51869"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="51869" data-sentence-id="52028" class="ldml-sentence">As noted above, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_52028"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> requires an intent to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect, injure, or harm another person."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="51869" data-sentence-id="52131" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_52131"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>, in contrast, requires an intent to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm."</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="52226" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="52226" data-sentence-id="52226" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_52226"><span class="ldml-cite">¶88</span></a></span> The terms <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harass,"</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"annoy,"</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"threaten,"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"alarm,"</span> as those terms are generally used, all refer to emotional states.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="52226" data-sentence-id="52350" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">See, e.g., <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1227" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_52362"></span> Harass,</i> Webster's Third New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity">2002</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harass"</span> to mean, as pertinent here, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to vex, trouble, or annoy continually or chronically"</span>)</span>; <i class="ldml-italics">Annoy,</i> Webster's Third New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"annoy"</span> to mean, as pertinent here, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to irritate with a nettling or exasperating effect esp. by being a continuous or repeatedly renewed source of vexation"</span>)</span>; <i class="ldml-italics">Threaten,</i> Webster's Third New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"threaten"</span> to mean, as pertinent here, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to utter threats against : promise punishment, reprisal, or other distress to"</span>)</span>; <i class="ldml-italics">Alarm,</i> Webster's Third New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"alarm"</span> to mean, as pertinent here, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"fear or terror resulting from a sudden sense of danger"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"apprehension of an unfavorable outcome, of failure, or of dangerous consequences"</span>)</span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="53177" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="53177" data-sentence-id="53177" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_53177"><span class="ldml-cite">¶89</span></a></span> In contrast, it appears undisputed that the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect"</span> refers to a physical consequence.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="53177" data-sentence-id="53273" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">See Infect,</i> Webster's Third New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect"</span> to mean, as pertinent here, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to communicate a pathogen or a disease to"</span>)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="53177" data-sentence-id="53423" class="ldml-sentence">And although <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> can relate to both physical and emotional injuries or harm, I believe that those terms most often connote physical effects.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="53177" data-sentence-id="53580" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">See, e.g., Injure,</i> Webster's Third New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure"</span> to mean, among other things, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to inflict bodily hurt on"</span>)</span>; <i class="ldml-italics">Harm,</i> Webster's Third New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> to mean, among other things, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to cause hurt or damage to : injure"</span>)</span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="53858" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="53858" data-sentence-id="53858" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_53858"><span class="ldml-cite">¶90</span></a></span> To me, distinguishing second and third degree assault in this way <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(i.e., depending on whether the actor's intent was to cause physical or emotional harm)</span> makes logical sense.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="53858" data-sentence-id="54037" class="ldml-sentence">Although, to be sure, emotional trauma can be extremely serious and debilitating, in general, an intent to cause physical harm <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(including an intent to pass on a communicable disease)</span> is viewed as more serious—justifying a more serious penalty—than an intent to cause emotional harm such as harassment, annoyance, a feeling of being threatened, or alarm.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="54390" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="54390" data-sentence-id="54390" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_54390"><span class="ldml-cite">¶91</span></a></span> Moreover, such an interpretation strikes me as the most consistent with the doctrine of <i class="ldml-italics">ejusdem generis.</i></span> <span data-paragraph-id="54390" data-sentence-id="54499" class="ldml-sentence">It is clear to me that the terms <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harass,"</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"annoy,"</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"threaten,"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"alarm"</span> all fall into the category of emotional ills.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="54390" data-sentence-id="54621" class="ldml-sentence">In contrast, the terms <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"injure"</span> most often connote physical effects, and when looked at in that light, I would apply the <i class="ldml-italics">ejusdem generis</i> doctrine to construe <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> for purposes of the second degree assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>, likewise to refer to physical harm.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="54886" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="54886" data-sentence-id="54886" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_54886"><span class="ldml-cite">¶92</span></a></span> Such an interpretation also strikes me as consistent with the statutory history of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_54886"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="54886" data-sentence-id="54997" class="ldml-sentence">As discussed above, that provision was the product of a legislative decision to split the intent to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect, injure, or harm"</span> from the intent to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm"</span> and to establish more serious penalties for the former.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="54886" data-sentence-id="55234" class="ldml-sentence">The most natural dividing line between those separate mental states is the intent to cause physical, as opposed to emotional, harm.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="54886" data-sentence-id="55366" class="ldml-sentence">And unlike the majority, I perceive nothing in the legislative history to the contrary.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="54886" data-sentence-id="55454" class="ldml-sentence">Indeed, I perceive nothing at all in the legislative history that informs the meaning of the term <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> here.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="55564" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="55564" data-sentence-id="55564" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_55564"><span class="ldml-cite">¶93</span></a></span> Finally, and perhaps most significant, defining <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm"</span> to connote physical harm best avoids constitutional problems because it eliminates overlap between <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_55564"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(second degree assault)</span></span> and <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_55564"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(third degree assault)</span></span> and provides a clear line to allow prosecutors, jurors, and <span class="ldml-entity">courts</span> to distinguish between <span class="ldml-entity">those statutes</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="55564" data-sentence-id="55925" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">( <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_55925"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> contains all of the mental states of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_55925"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>, as well as the intent to infect, injure, or harm, and for that reason, it inevitably overlaps with <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_55925"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>, at least to the extent that both <span class="ldml-entity">statutes</span> apply to peace officers like the deputies involved here.)</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="56238" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="56238" data-sentence-id="56238" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_56238"><span class="ldml-cite">¶94</span></a></span> For these reasons, I would conclude that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> for purposes of the second degree assault <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span>, means physical harm.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="56238" data-sentence-id="56363" class="ldml-sentence">Because <span class="ldml-entity">the People</span> have conceded that no evidence exists to support a finding that Plemmons intended to cause either Deputy Blakley or Deputy Paige physical harm, I would conclude that the evidence was insufficient to support Plemmons's convictions under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_56363"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="56238" data-sentence-id="56642" class="ldml-sentence">I would thus reverse the judgments of conviction on those counts, and I would reverse and remand for a new trial, before a properly instructed jury, <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-vol="517" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="1228" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_56791"></span> Plemmons's conviction under <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_56642"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span>, which allows for a conviction if <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> intended either physical or emotional harm.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth3" data-specifier="D" data-value="D. A Call for Legislative Action" data-parsed="true" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-ordinal_end="4" data-ordinal_start="4" data-id="heading_56929" data-content-heading-label="D. A Call for Legislative Action" id="heading_56929"><span data-paragraph-id="56929" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="56929" data-sentence-id="56929" class="ldml-sentence">D.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="56929" data-sentence-id="56932" class="ldml-sentence">A Call for <span class="ldml-entity">Legislative Action</span></span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="56961" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="56961" data-sentence-id="56961" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_56961"><span class="ldml-cite">¶95</span></a></span> As should be clear from <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> and division decisions below, <span class="ldml-entity">the parties</span>' substantial briefing throughout <span class="ldml-entity">this case</span>, and <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity">this court</span>'s opinions</span> today, the language of <span class="ldml-entity">sections</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> is problematic and, reasonable minds might argue, unconstitutional <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I express no opinion on that subject here)</span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="57299" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="57299" data-sentence-id="57299" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_57299"><span class="ldml-cite">¶96</span></a></span> In light of the foregoing, I respectfully encourage the General Assembly to revisit these statutory provisions with an eye toward clarifying what it intended by <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"intent to ... harm"</span> and articulating more clearly and precisely the proscribed conduct, and in a way that is easily distinguishable from the conduct proscribed by <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_57299"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span>, so as to avoid any questions as to <span class="ldml-entity">sections</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>'s ongoing constitutionality.</span></p></div></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-confidences="very_high" data-ordinal_end="3" data-value="III. Conclusion" data-parsed="true" data-types="conclusion" data-specifier="III" data-ordinal_start="3" data-id="heading_57763" data-content-heading-label="III. Conclusion" id="heading_57763"><span data-paragraph-id="57763" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="57763" data-sentence-id="57763" class="ldml-sentence">III.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="57763" data-sentence-id="57768" class="ldml-sentence">Conclusion</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="57778" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="57778" data-sentence-id="57778" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_57778"><span class="ldml-cite">¶97</span></a></span> For the above-described reasons, I cannot subscribe to the definition of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm,"</span> as that word is used in <span class="ldml-entity">sections</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>, that the majority adopts today.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="57778" data-sentence-id="57968" class="ldml-sentence">I would instead adopt a definition that construes harm to mean physical harm because I believe that such a definition is consistent with the statutory text and with the pertinent statutory history, and because I further believe that such a definition best avoids questions as to <span class="ldml-entity">sections</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> and 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>'s constitutionality.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="58315" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="58315" data-sentence-id="58315" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_58315"><span class="ldml-cite">¶98</span></a></span> In light of the foregoing, I would reverse Plemmons's convictions under <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_58315"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">because no evidence supports a finding of her intent to cause physical harm</span>)</span></span>, and I would reverse and remand for a new trial, before a properly instructed jury, Plemmons's conviction under <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_58315"><span class="ldml-cite">section 18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(because that <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> allows for conviction if Plemmons intended either physical or emotional harm)</span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="58732" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="58732" data-sentence-id="58732" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_58732"><span class="ldml-cite">¶99</span></a></span> Accordingly, I respectfully concur in the majority's judgment, only.</span></p></div></div></div><div class="ldml-notes content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Footnotes"><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="58804" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr1" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr1">1</a> <span data-paragraph-id="58804" data-sentence-id="58805" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Detention facility"</span> in subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">f.5</span></a></span>)</span> includes <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"any ... vehicle ... where persons are or may be lawfully held in custody or confinement."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="58804" data-sentence-id="58946" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_58805"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 18-3-203 <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span></span></a></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(f.5)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(III)</span></span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(A)</span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="58974" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr2" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr2">2</a> <span data-paragraph-id="58974" data-sentence-id="58975" class="ldml-sentence">For ease of reference, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> will refer to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect, injure, or harm"</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(as it appears in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_58975"><span class="ldml-cite">subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span></span></a></span>)</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect, injure, harm, harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm"</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(as it appears in subsection <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">f.5</span></a></span>)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(I)</span>)</span> as the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"intended effects."</span></span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="59202" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr3" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr3">3</a> <span data-paragraph-id="59202" data-sentence-id="59203" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_59203"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 18-3-204<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span></span></a></span> provides that:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_59240" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="59240" class="ldml-sentence">A person commits the crime of assault in the third degree if: <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[t]</span>he person, with intent to harass, annoy, threaten, or alarm another person whom the actor knows or reasonably should know to be a peace officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical care provider, or an emergency medical service provider, causes the other person to come into contact with blood, seminal fluid, urine, feces, saliva, mucus, vomit, or toxic, caustic, or hazardous material by any means, including throwing, tossing, or expelling the fluid or material.</span></blockquote><p data-paragraph-id="59770" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="59770" data-sentence-id="59770" class="ldml-sentence">Thus, spitting on one or more of the types of <span class="ldml-entity">people</span> listed can be a felony or a misdemeanor depending on the actor's specific intent.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="59904" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr4" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr4">4</a> <span data-paragraph-id="59904" data-sentence-id="59905" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> granted certiorari to review the following issues:</span></p><div class="ldml-embeddeddocument"><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_59958" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="59958" class="ldml-sentence">1.</span> <span data-sentence-id="59961" class="ldml-sentence">Whether <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span> reversibly erred by instructing the jury on <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harm."</span></span></blockquote><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_60036" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="60036" class="ldml-sentence">2.</span> <span data-sentence-id="60039" class="ldml-sentence">Whether there was sufficient evidence that <span class="ldml-entity">petitioner</span> intended to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"infect, injure, or harm"</span> under <span class="ldml-entity">section</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">18-3-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(h)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2022</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></blockquote></div></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="60175" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr5" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr5">5</a> <span data-paragraph-id="60175" data-sentence-id="60176" class="ldml-sentence">According to the explanatory notes in Webster's Third New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity">2002</span>)</span>, the dictionary's use of numbers to separate different definitions, or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"senses,"</span> of a word <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"reflects something of the semantic relationship between various senses of a word,"</span> but it is only for <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"lexical convenience"</span> and doesn't <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"establish an enduring hierarchy of importance among <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[the senses]</span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="60175" data-sentence-id="60562" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">at n.12.4</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="60175" data-sentence-id="60577" class="ldml-sentence">Rather, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[t]</span>he order of senses is historical: the one known to have been first used in English is entered first."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="60175" data-sentence-id="60691" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">at n.12.5</span></a></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="60705" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr6" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr6">6</a> <span data-paragraph-id="60705" data-sentence-id="60706" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> have previously cited with approval the following dictionary definitions of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"harass"</span>: <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"exhaust, fatigue"</span>; <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to annoy persistently"</span>; and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[,]</span> especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="60705" data-sentence-id="60964" class="ldml-sentence">Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/<i class="ldml-italics">harass</i> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[https://perma.cc/5LTT-TZUE]</span>)<span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">see</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/899555673" data-vids="899555673" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_60964"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Moreno</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
2022 CO 15</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_60964"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 20</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_60964" data-refglobal="case:506p3d849,854–55"><span class="ldml-cite">
506 P.3d 849, 854–55</span></a></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="61135" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr7" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr7">7</a> <span data-paragraph-id="61135" data-sentence-id="61136" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Annoy"</span> means <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to irritate with a nettling or exasperating effect,"</span> with <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"nettling"</span> meaning <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to arouse displeasure, impatience, or anger in: provoke, vex."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="61135" data-sentence-id="61292" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888315320" data-vids="888315320" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_61136"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Bolles v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
189 Colo. 394</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">
541 P.2d 80, 82–83</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1975</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(quoting <i class="ldml-italics">Annoy,</i> Webster's New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_61136"><span class="ldml-cite">3d ed. 1961</span></a></span>)</span>)</span></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="61421" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr8" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr8">8</a> <span data-paragraph-id="61421" data-sentence-id="61422" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"A threat is a statement of purpose or intent to cause injury or harm to the person, property, or rights of another, by the commission of an unlawful act."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="61421" data-sentence-id="61578" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887246530" data-vids="887246530" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_61422"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Hines</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">
780 P.2d 556, 559</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1989</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="61626" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr9" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr9">9</a> <span data-paragraph-id="61626" data-sentence-id="61627" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">" <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘Alarm’</span> means <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘to arouse to a sense of danger; to put on the alert; to strike with fear; fill with anxiety as to threaten danger or harm.’</span> "</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="61626" data-sentence-id="61770" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888315320" data-vids="888315320" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_61627"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Bolles</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">541 P.2d at 83</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(quoting <i class="ldml-italics">Alarm,</i> Webster's New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_61627"><span class="ldml-cite">3d ed. 1961</span></a></span>)</span>)</span></span>.</span></p></div></div></div></div> </div> </div>
Document Info
Docket Number： Supreme Court Case No. 21SC183
Citation Numbers： 517 P.3d 1210
Filed Date： 9/26/2022
Precedential Status： Precedential
Modified Date： 7/29/2024