This answer assumes that L is the language of all representations of Turing machines which halt on some input.
First, this language must be semi-decidable, or recursively enumerable, because we can enumerate Turing-machine encodings that halt on some input. To accomplish this, begin enumerating all binary strings. At each stage, begin a new TM which begins simulating execution of the machine encoded by the string just generated on all possible inputs. Continue on so that all possible TM encodings are being simulated on all possible inputs. Dovetail the executions of these machines so that each one gets its next time quantum within finite time so that every possible input is simulated on every possible TM in finite time. If any of the simulations ever halt, then we print out the encoding that halted on the input and we can stop simulating that encoding. This must eventually print out any encoding in the language, so the language is enumerated. This means we can answer the question, "is this TM in the language?" for any provided TM given that the answer is yes (since we will eventually encounter it).
Second, the language cannot be decidable, or recursive, because this gives us a clear method of deciding the halting problem: ask whether the TM in question in in the language, and get a yes or no answer back as to whether it halts on some input. We can always modify the TM of interest so that it can only possibly halt on whatever input is of interest and then feed it into our decider if we have a specific input in mind.
Third, these facts imply that the language is not co-recursively enumerable, since its being both recursively enumerable and co-recursively enumerable would imply it is recursive, which is not the case.
