Colorado
Colorado GPS Tracking Laws: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited June 17, 2026). · Law checked current as of August 9, 2026. How we verify our legal content
Colorado quietly became one of the best states in the country for fighting back against secret GPS tracking. A new civil law that took effect on August 7, 2024 lets you sue anyone who hides a tracker on your car, or pushes a tracking app onto your phone, without your consent.
That law sits on top of Colorado's felony stalking statute, which already reaches electronic surveillance. So is it legal to put a tracker on a car in Colorado? It depends entirely on whose car it is and why you are tracking it.
Is It Legal to Put a GPS Tracker on a Car in Colorado?
You can generally put a GPS tracker on a vehicle you own. That covers your own car, a business tracking its fleet, and a parent who holds the title to a teenager's car.
Ownership is not the whole test, though. C.R.S. 13-20-1301(2)(a) creates liability two separate ways: against an actor who installed a tracking device on the person's personal property without consent, and against one who caused a tracking device or tracking application to track the position or movement of the person without that person's consent. Only the first prong turns on who owns the property. So if you use a car you own, or a tracker you own, to monitor the movements of a specific adult who has not agreed to it, that person can still bring a claim. The section is titled "Actions for tracking a person without consent," not tracking property.
You cannot legally put a tracker on someone else's car without their consent. Since August 2024, the person you track can sue you for damages under C.R.S. 13-20-1301, including noneconomic damages for emotional harm. And if the tracking is part of a pattern that threatens the person or causes them serious emotional distress, prosecutors can charge felony stalking.
Colorado does not have a standalone criminal statute aimed only at tracking devices, the way some states do. Instead, it pairs a broad new civil remedy with one of the tougher stalking laws in the country.
Colorado's New Civil Tracking Law (C.R.S. 13-20-1301)
The General Assembly passed Senate Bill 24-011 in 2024, Governor Polis signed it on June 5, 2024, and the tracking provisions took effect August 7, 2024. That makes Colorado's one of the newest civil tracking laws in the nation.
The statute is broad. A person who was tracked can sue the "actor" who installed a tracking device on their personal property without consent, or who caused a tracking device or tracking application to track them or their property without consent.
Both hardware and software count. A "tracking device" is any electronic or mechanical device that lets someone remotely track another person's position or movement. A "tracking application" is software that does the same thing, which sweeps in phone spyware, stalkerware, and shared-location apps used without permission.
Damages include noneconomic loss or injury, so you can recover for the fear and emotional toll of being followed, not just out-of-pocket costs.
One detail matters a lot in relationship cases: consent can be revoked at any time. If you once agreed to share your location and later withdrew that consent, the statute expressly allows a claim for any tracking after revocation.
Who the Civil Law Does Not Cover
The enrolled bill lists a short set of exceptions. You cannot bring a claim against:
- A law enforcement agency or peace officer for actions taken as part of a criminal investigation
- A peace officer acting within the scope of official duties
- A public highway authority acting within its authority to collect tolls, or the High Performance Transportation Enterprise acting within its authority to collect tolls and enforce toll and safety violations
- A parent or legal guardian of a minor child for tracking that minor child
Notice what is missing. There is no exception for spouses, ex-partners, private investigators, or employers. A suspicious spouse who plants a tracker on the other spouse's car has no statutory safe harbor in Colorado.
When Tracking Becomes Criminal Stalking (C.R.S. 18-3-602)
Colorado's stalking statute, known as Vonnie's Law, is the main criminal tool against GPS tracking. It is named for Vonnie Flores, a Leadville woman murdered in 2010 by a stalker who had been arrested for violating a restraining order, then released on bond within hours without ever appearing before a judge.
![]()
A person commits stalking by knowingly making a credible threat and, in connection with it, repeatedly following, approaching, contacting, or placing under surveillance the victim, a family member, or someone close to the victim. The statute also covers a second path that needs no threat at all: repeatedly following, contacting, surveilling, or communicating with someone in a way that would cause a reasonable person serious emotional distress and actually does cause that distress.
The phrase "places under surveillance" is where GPS comes in. Colorado courts and prosecutors treat electronic monitoring, including a hidden GPS unit on a car, as surveillance under the statute. Secretly tracking an ex's movements for weeks can qualify on its own if it causes serious emotional distress.
Stalking is a felony from the first offense. A first conviction is a class 5 felony. It becomes a class 4 felony for a second offense within seven years, or when the stalking occurred while a protection order, bond condition, probation, or parole term prohibiting the conduct was in effect. Stalking is also designated an extraordinary risk crime under C.R.S. 18-1.3-401(10), which raises the top of the sentencing range by one year for the class 5 version and two years for the class 4 version.
Federal law adds another layer. The federal stalking statute, 18 U.S.C. 2261A, criminalizes courses of conduct using electronic monitoring that place a victim in fear or cause substantial emotional distress, with penalties up to five years in prison. And in United States v. Jones (2012), the U.S. Supreme Court held that attaching a GPS device to a car is a Fourth Amendment search, which is why even police generally need a warrant.
Who Can Legally Track a Vehicle in Colorado
- The vehicle's owner. You can track a car titled in your name, including a company tracking its own fleet vehicles. Ownership answers the installation prong, not the person prong. If the real object of the tracking is a specific non-consenting adult's movements, the statute can still reach you.
- Parents and legal guardians of minors. Both the civil statute's exception and ordinary parental authority cover tracking a minor child's phone or car.
- Law enforcement with a warrant. Police can install trackers as part of a criminal investigation, subject to the Fourth Amendment rule from United States v. Jones.
- Toll authorities. Colorado's express-lane and toll enforcement systems are expressly carved out of the civil statute.
- Anyone with genuine, current consent. Written consent is best, and remember that consent can be revoked at any time.
Co-owned vehicles are the gray zone. If both spouses are on the title, installing a tracker is probably not a violation of the installation prong as to that car. That does not make the tracking lawful. The second prong of C.R.S. 13-20-1301(2)(a) reaches causing a device to track the position or movement of the person without their consent, so a co-owner who uses the shared car to monitor the other spouse can still face a civil claim. Covert surveillance can also feed a stalking charge or a protection order, and divorce judges take a dim view of it.
Can My Employer Track My Car in Colorado?
Colorado has no statute specifically governing employer GPS tracking, so the general rules fill the gap.
If you drive a company-owned vehicle, your employer can generally track the vehicle. The company owns the asset, so installing a device on it does not violate the installation prong. That is not unlimited permission to track the driver. Because C.R.S. 13-20-1301(2)(a) separately reaches causing a device to track a person's movements without consent, monitoring that follows an employee's personal movements rather than the vehicle's business use remains exposed. Best practice is written disclosure, employee consent, and tracking tied to business purposes like routing, mileage, and safety.
If you drive your personal vehicle, the calculus changed in August 2024. An employer who installs a tracker on an employee's own car, or requires a tracking app on a personal phone, needs the employee's consent to stay outside C.R.S. 13-20-1301. And because consent is revocable, continued tracking after an employee withdraws it is actionable.
Around-the-clock monitoring of off-duty movements also invites a claim for intrusion upon seclusion, Colorado's common-law privacy tort. Workplace monitoring often overlaps with audio and video rules, covered in our guide to Colorado recording laws.
AirTags and Item Trackers
Apple AirTags, Tile trackers, and Samsung SmartTags all fit Colorado's definition of a tracking device. Dropping an AirTag into someone's bag or magnet-mounting one under their bumper is treated exactly like installing a traditional GPS unit. The victim can sue under C.R.S. 13-20-1301, and a pattern of AirTag tracking that causes serious emotional distress supports a stalking charge.
![]()
Both iPhone and Android push unknown-tracker alerts when an unrecognized tracker moves with you. Take those alerts seriously. The alert usually lets you make the tracker play a sound and shows a serial number, which police can use to identify the owner.
Penalties and Damages
| Violation | Law | Classification | Penalty |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stalking, first offense | C.R.S. 18-3-602 | Class 5 felony | 1 to 4 years in prison, mandatory parole, fines of $1,000 to $100,000 |
| Stalking, second offense within 7 years or while a protection order or bond condition was in effect | C.R.S. 18-3-602 | Class 4 felony | 2 to 8 years in prison, mandatory parole, fines of $2,000 to $500,000 |
| Installing a tracker or tracking app without consent | C.R.S. 13-20-1301 | Civil claim | Actual damages, including noneconomic loss or injury |
| Stalking using electronic monitoring (interstate or with federal hook) | 18 U.S.C. 2261A | Federal felony | Up to 5 years in prison, more if the victim is injured |
Sentencing ranges reflect stalking's status as an extraordinary risk crime, which extends the standard presumptive maximums. Aggravating circumstances can extend them further.
What to Do If You Find a Tracker on Your Car
- Photograph it in place. Capture where it was mounted before touching it. Location and mounting method are evidence.
- Do not destroy it. It may carry fingerprints, a serial number, or a registered owner. Destroying it destroys your proof.
- Call the police and get a report number. Ask the department to trace the device. A documented report supports both criminal charges and your civil claim.
- Consider a protection order. A discovered tracker is strong evidence of stalking behavior. Our guide to Colorado restraining order laws walks through the process.
- Talk to a civil attorney. C.R.S. 13-20-1301 gives you a direct claim for damages, including emotional harm, and you do not need to wait for a prosecutor.
- Check your phone too. Tracking apps are covered by the same statute. Review location-sharing settings and look for unfamiliar apps.
If the tracker came with a hidden camera, different rules apply. See our state-by-state guide to surveillance camera laws.
![]()
For rules in other states, see our full guide to GPS Tracking Laws by State.
Sources
- Senate Bill 24-011, signed act (PDF), Colorado General Assembly
- SB24-011 bill page and history, Colorado General Assembly
- Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 18 (C.R.S. 18-3-602, stalking), Office of Legislative Legal Services
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012), Supreme Court of the United States
- 18 U.S.C. § 2261A, stalking, Office of the Law Revision Counsel
Disclaimer: This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Statutes change and every situation is different. If you are dealing with tracking or stalking, contact a Colorado attorney or call local law enforcement. If you are in immediate danger, call 911.
More Colorado Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I put a GPS tracker on my spouse's car in Colorado?
Not without consent. Colorado's civil tracking law, C.R.S. 13-20-1301, has no exception for spouses, so your spouse can sue you for tracking their personal vehicle without permission. If the car is jointly titled, the installation claim is weaker, but the statute's second prong still reaches causing a device to track your spouse's movements without consent, and covert tracking can also support a stalking charge or protection order and will hurt you in divorce court.
Is it illegal to track someone with an AirTag in Colorado?
Yes, if they have not consented. An AirTag meets the statute's definition of a tracking device, so planting one in someone's bag or on their car exposes you to a civil lawsuit under C.R.S. 13-20-1301. A repeated pattern of tracking that causes serious emotional distress can also be charged as felony stalking under C.R.S. 18-3-602.
Can I sue someone for putting a tracker on my car in Colorado?
Yes. Since August 7, 2024, C.R.S. 13-20-1301 gives you a private right of action against anyone who installed a tracking device on your personal property or caused a device or app to track you without consent. You can recover actual damages, including noneconomic damages for emotional harm.
Can my parents legally track my phone or car in Colorado?
If you are under 18, yes. The civil statute expressly exempts a parent or legal guardian tracking their minor child. Once you turn 18, that exception disappears, and a parent who keeps tracking an adult child without consent is in the same legal position as anyone else.
Do Colorado police need a warrant to put a GPS tracker on a car?
Generally yes. In United States v. Jones (2012), the U.S. Supreme Court held that attaching a GPS device to a vehicle is a Fourth Amendment search, which ordinarily requires a warrant. Colorado's civil statute separately shields officers from civil claims for tracking done as part of a criminal investigation.
What if I agreed to location sharing but changed my mind?
Colorado law is unusually clear on this. C.R.S. 13-20-1301(2)(b) says a person who consented to tracking may revoke that consent at any time and may sue for any tracking that occurs after revocation. Tell the person clearly, in writing if possible, that consent is withdrawn.
Can a car dealer or lender legally track my financed car?
Usually yes, because the financing or lease agreement you signed typically includes consent to a GPS or starter-interrupt device. That contractual consent takes the lender outside the civil statute. Read your contract; if no consent language exists and a device was hidden on the car, the statute may apply.
Is finding a GPS tracker enough to get a protection order in Colorado?
It is strong evidence. Colorado courts grant civil protection orders based on stalking behavior, and a hidden tracker is direct proof of being placed under surveillance. Pair the device with a police report and any history of following or contact, and you have a solid foundation for an order.
Updates
Clarified that Colorado's civil tracking statute has a second, ownership-independent prong: owning the vehicle or device does not immunize tracking a non-consenting person's movements under C.R.S. 13-20-1301(2)(a).
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 13: Courts and Court Procedure
§ 13-20-1301Actions for tracking a person without consent - definitionsIn force
(1) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires: (a) Actor means a person who tracks another person through the use of a tracking application or tracking device. (b) Tracking application means any software program that permits an actor to remotely determine or track the position or movement of another person or another person's property. (c) Tracking device means an electronic or mechanical device that permits an actor to remotely determine or track the position or movement of another person or another person's personal property. (2) (a) A person who was tracked by means of a tracking device or tracking application may bring a claim for damages, including noneconomic loss or injury, against the actor who installed a tracking device on the person's personal property without the person's consent or who caused a tracking device or tracking application to track the position or movement of the person or person's personal property without the person's consent. An actor is liable to the extent the actor's conduct was the proximate cause of the harm caused by the tracking device or tracking application.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at olls.info
Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 18: Criminal Code
§ 18-3-602Stalking - penalty - definitions - Vonnie's lawIn force
(1) A person commits stalking if directly, or indirectly through another person, the person knowingly: (a) Makes a credible threat to another person and, in connection with the threat, repeatedly follows, approaches, contacts, or places under surveillance that person, a member of that person's immediate family, or someone with whom that person has or has had a continuing relationship; or (b) Makes a credible threat to another person and, in connection with the threat, repeatedly makes any form of communication with that person, a member of that person's immediate family, or someone with whom that person has or has had a continuing relationship, regardless of whether a conversation ensues; or (c) Repeatedly follows, approaches, contacts, places under surveillance, or makes any form of communication with another person, a member of that person's immediate family, or someone with whom that person has or has had a continuing relationship in a manner that would cause a reasonable person to suffer serious emotional distress and does cause that person, a member of that person's immediate family, or someone with whom that person has or has had a continuing relationship to suffer…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at olls.info
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- United States v. Twitty (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2023)“…e was indicted for violating Colorado’s stalking statute, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-3-602(1)(b), as assimilated by the…”
- Williams IV v. Carbajol (District Court, D. Colorado 2021)“…rado law also provides a tort-law remedy for stalking. See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-3-602 (“A person commit stalking if directly,…”
- Gabriel v. El Paso Combined Courts (District Court, D. Colorado 2019)“…tion for a Restraining Order” cites two legal pro- visions: Colo. Rev. Stat. § 18-3-602 (“Stalking”) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
United States Code Title 18
§ 2261AStalkingIn forcecited in 53 of our articles
Whoever— travels in interstate or foreign commerce or is present within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or enters or leaves Indian country, with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, and in the course of, or as a result of, such travel or presence engages in conduct that— places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to— that person; an immediate family member (as defined in section 115) of that person; a spouse or intimate partner of that person; or the pet, service animal, emotional support animal, or horse of that person; or causes, attempts to cause, or would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress to a person described in clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of subparagraph (A); or with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, uses the mail, any interactive computer service or electronic communication service or electronic communication system of interstate commerce, or any other…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 350 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Federal appeals courts have construed and upheld Section 2261A. United States v. Walker (2011) read in the course of, or as a result of such travel disjunctively, so pre-travel threats plus resulting fear sufficed. United States v. Amy Gonzalez (2018) held it neither overbroad nor vague and no First Amendment violation as applied.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- United States v. Walker (Court of Appeals for the First Circuit 2011, 665 F.3d 212)✓After emailing threats to his estranged wife, the defendant flew from Michigan to Puerto Rico and was arrested on arrival. The court read the disjunctive phrase in 2261A(1) to cover travel that itself places the target in reasonable fear, and upheld the stalking conviction.
- United States v. Amy Gonzalez (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2018, 905 F.3d 165)✓Relatives waged a years-long campaign against a mother that ended in a courthouse shooting. The court held 2261A is neither overbroad nor vague because it reaches harassing conduct, and that the mental states it lists are alternative means, not elements; convictions affirmed.
- United States v. Wills (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2003, 346 F.3d 476)✓A burglary suspect pursued the witness who identified him at a preliminary hearing; the witness later died. The court held the evidence met each element of 2261A: travel from D.C. to Virginia, intent to harm or harass, and reasonable fear of death; conviction affirmed.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alabama GPS Tracking Laws: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026), Florida GPS Tracking Laws: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026), Ohio GPS Tracking Laws: Is It Legal to Put a Tracker on a Car? (2026)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Senate Bill 24-011, signed act - C.R.S. 13-20-1301 civil action for tracking(leg.colorado.gov)
- SB24-011 bill page and history, Colorado General Assembly(leg.colorado.gov)
- Colorado Revised Statutes Title 18 - C.R.S. 18-3-602 stalking (Vonnie's law)(leg.colorado.gov)
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012)(supremecourt.gov)
- 18 U.S.C. 2261A - Federal stalking statute(uscode.house.gov)