(1) The provisions of this section are nonexclusive and in no way limit the effect or applicability of section 18-15-102.
(2) In any prosecution under section 18-15-102, if it is shown that the factors enumerated in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this subsection (2) were present in connection with the making of the extension of credit in question, there shall arise a presumption that the extension of credit was extortionate:
(a) The extension of credit was made with a loan finance charge in excess of that established for criminal usury.
(b) At the time credit was extended, the debtor reasonably believed that one or more extensions of credit by the creditor had been collected or attempted to be collected by extortionate means or the nonrepayment thereof had been punished by extortionate means.
(c) Upon the making of the extension of credit, the total of the extensions of credit by the creditor to the debtor then outstanding, including any unpaid interest or similar charges, exceeded one hundred dollars.
(3) In any prosecution under section 18-15-102, evidence of similar offenses tending to establish the existence of a plan, scheme, or design on the part of the defendant to produce a result of which the act charged is a part shall be admissible in evidence against the defendant. Such evidence of similar offenses, if known to the debtor, shall also be admissible in evidence for the purpose of establishing the reasonable belief of the debtor referred to in paragraph (b) of subsection (2) of this section.
(4) Whether evidence introduced under the provisions of subsection (2) of this section giving rise to the presumption that the extension of credit was extortionate is sufficient to establish the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, if such evidence is not disputed, is a question to be determined by the jury under proper instructions or by the court if no jury trial is had. Where there is evidence tending to show the innocence of the transaction, the issue of whether the extension of credit was extortionate shall be submitted to the jury, if trial is to a jury, unless the court is satisfied that the evidence as a whole clearly negates the presumed offense.
Copyright ©2024 LegalFix. All rights reserved. LegalFix is not a law firm, is not licensed to practice law, and does not provide legal advice, services, or representation. The information on this website is an overview of the legal plans you can purchase—or that may be provided by your employer as an employee benefit or by your credit union or other membership group as a membership benefit.
LegalFix provides its members with easy access to affordable legal services through a network of independent law firms. LegalFix, its corporate entity, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, and contractors do not provide legal advice, services, or representation—directly or indirectly.
The articles and information on the site are not legal advice and should not be relied upon—they are for information purposes only. You should become a LegalFix member to get legal services from one of our network law firms.
You should not disclose confidential or potentially incriminating information to LegalFix—you should only communicate such information to your network law firm.
The benefits and legal services described in the LegalFix legal plans are not always available in all states or with all plans. See the legal plan Benefit Overview and the more comprehensive legal plan contract during checkout for coverage details in your state.
Use of this website, the purchase of legal plans, and access to the LegalFix networks of law firms are subject to the LegalFix Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.