Quote Quoting Highwayman
View Post
Now you just have to check every law for definitions of "public highway". It may very well be considered to be a public highway.
Interesting, and thank you for the dialogue.

The question now comes to mind, how does one define "the entire width" for a private street, without referring to property boundaries? But I do agree that perhaps now there is some sort of definition out there that can help clarify such.

I'll have to ask, I'm guessing, the DOT or something like that, if the private drives in question are "declared to be a public highway."

After a brief search, I did find the C.R.S. definition of a highway...

Colorado Revised Statutes § 42-1-102(43):

"Highway" means the entire width between the boundary lines of every way publicly maintained when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel or the entire width of every way declared to be a public highway by any law of this state.

Colorado Revisted Statues § 43-1-203(1):

"Highway" includes bridges on the roadway and culverts, sluices, drains, ditches, waterways, embankments, retaining walls, trees, shrubs, and fences along or upon the same and within the right-of-way, and any subsurface support acquired in accordance with section 43-1-209.

...though it is identical to the already mentioned Boulder city definition of street. So I guess that leads me back to sniffing up the trail of, like I said, who declares what is a public highway, and if said private streets have been declared as such. I did find a Boulder local roads map, which did not include said 29th Street private drives, and a snow removal map I found that reflected the same. I wonder if the DOT is indeed who I can talk to, to see if they have a list of "declared public highways" -- anybody happen to know off-hand what department / organization I might be able to refer to next?

BTW, there are a couple of other private drives I have been picked up on, like on the "median" at the entrance to the Safeway near 104th and Federal (in Federal Heights) and in the right turn lane "sidewalk" at the entrance to the Walmart at the 9400 block of Sheridan (in Westminster) that are definitely not through streets in any way, of which I can only imagine are then, less likely to be considered or declared "public highways," that I can only imagine the police have even less arguable probable cause to pick somebody up on. But I guess I'll have to do more research on them as well.

Actually, here's a really good question I've been meaning to ask. There is an actual median that my brother was picked up on in Fort Collins, at the intersection of Research Blvd and Shields. The officer didn't have the correct statute whatsoever (and had erroneously cited something relating to needing to cross the street, which we both looked up later, wasn't even in the code he thought it was either). He never referred to the city's median statute, and had eventually apologized for "impeding" on my brothers day after confirming that he was mistaken on the original statute. So my question is, if my brother really was in violation of an ordinance to which a knowledgeable officer could have picked him up legally on, but this particular officer didn't know that ordinance, did the officer lack arguable probable cause for the arrest, or is he not liable simply because there was still a legitimate crime to which my brother was in violation of anyways, despite the cop not officially getting him on it? I think I read somewhere that if a legitimate crime still otherwise existed *somewhere* in the arrest process, during an arrest, that the probable cause for the arrest still exists too. I could be totally mistaken though, it was a long time ago that I read it, to which I'll have to look up and see if I can find said case law again...