2020 COA 110
Colo. Ct. App.2020Background
- Police, investigating recent daytime residential burglaries, saw a Black male speaking to the driver of a green van in a park the officers described as high-crime. A white car observed later eluded police.
- Officers returned to the park, located K.D.W., who they believed matched the earlier male’s clothing; he sat on a bench with a backpack and a trash bag.
- An officer approached in an unmarked patrol vehicle, told K.D.W. “I need to talk to you,” asked him to remove his hand from his pocket and set down his bags, and asked to pat him down; K.D.W. twice refused and then fled, leaving the backpack.
- Officers chased and ultimately detained K.D.W. after he trespassed through private property; after detaining him, officers searching the abandoned backpack found a Ruger .22 pistol, ammunition, and marijuana.
- K.D.W. was charged as a juvenile with possession of a handgun, attempt to carry a concealed weapon, possession of marijuana, obstruction of a peace officer, and second-degree trespass; magistrate convicted on all counts and the district court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop of K.D.W. | Totality supported reasonable suspicion: recent burglaries, suspicious van contact in high-crime park, clothing match, K.D.W. carrying bags, and a white car that eluded police. | Facts were insufficient: morning, school-age juvenile in a park, vague clothing match, mere walking away and presence in a high-crime area do not supply reasonable suspicion. | Stop lacked reasonable suspicion; investigatory seizure was unlawful. |
| Whether evidence seized and statements were admissible under attenuation (search of backpack vs. pockets and post-arrest statements) | K.D.W.’s flight, trespass, and obstruction were independent criminal acts that attenuated the taint; items found on his person and his statements should be admissible; backpack was abandoned. | Backpack was seized during the illegal stop and is fruit of the poisonous tree; pocket search and statements also tainted unless attenuation applies. | Attenuation applies to K.D.W.’s later trespass/obstruction: pocket search and post-arrest statements admissible. Backpack was seized during the illegal stop and must be suppressed. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence to support obstruction conviction | Chase, fence-jump/trespass, refusal to submit to pat-down, reaching toward pocket/changing shirt, and leading officers on a multi-block pursuit support obstruction. | Flight alone is insufficient; officers lacked lawful basis to stop him so they were not enforcing the penal law. | Evidence sufficient under the totality of the circumstances; obstruction and trespass convictions affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (reasonable-suspicion framework for investigatory stops)
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963) (fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine)
- Utah v. Strieff, 136 S. Ct. 2056 (2016) (attenuation doctrine can admit evidence when intervening events break causal chain)
- People v. Dempsey, 117 P.3d 800 (Colo. 2005) (obstruction defined and evaluated under totality of circumstances)
- People v. Martinez, 200 P.3d 1053 (Colo. 2009) (suppressing evidence obtained from stop lacking reasonable suspicion)
- People v. Archuleta, 980 P.2d 509 (Colo. 1999) (high-crime area can be one factor but not dispositive)
- People v. Rodriguez, 945 P.2d 1351 (Colo. 1997) (exclusionary rule and taint analysis)