Peo v. Nero
22CA1055
| Colo. Ct. App. | Aug 22, 2024Background
- Ramon K. Nero was convicted by a jury of first-degree assault, second-degree assault, and aggravated robbery for an armed robbery at a Denver Circle K in September 2020, where the cashier was stabbed with a machete.
- Surveillance footage partially captured the incident, showing a struggle between the masked assailant and the cashier.
- Two days after the robbery, Nero was arrested in Aurora for an unrelated incident; police found a distinctive machete on him that resembled the weapon used in the robbery.
- While incarcerated, Nero wrote two letters to his ex-girlfriend: one admitting involvement in a Denver robbery and threatening her, another seeking a false alibi.
- At trial, Nero objected to the admission of the machete, details of the Aurora arrest, and the letters, arguing they were irrelevant and unduly prejudicial.
- The trial court admitted all contested evidence; Nero appealed, and the Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of machete & Aurora arrest evidence | Evidence is relevant to identification and probative of assailant. | Evidence is irrelevant, unfairly prejudicial, and lacks forensic link. | Admissible; highly probative, not unfairly prejudicial. |
| Admission of police testimony re: Aurora arrest | Needed to explain context of machete seizure and counter defense cross. | Irrelevant details about unrelated arrest are prejudicial. | Properly admitted; brief, contextual, not prejudicial. |
| Admission of first letter to ex-girlfriend | Constitutes an admission relevant to defendant's identity and guilt. | Irrelevant, contains threats, highly prejudicial. | Properly admitted; relevant admission, prejudice minimal. |
| Admission of second letter under Rule 404(b) | Shows consciousness of guilt—proves material element of the crime. | Inadmissible 404(b) evidence; suggests bad character, improper purpose. | Admissible; logical relevance, limiting instruction given. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Carlson, 712 P.2d 1018 (Colo. 1986) (articulates test for relevance and balancing probative value vs. unfair prejudice under Rules 401 & 403)
- Kaufman v. People, 202 P.3d 542 (Colo. 2009) (possession of unrelated weapons not automatically admissible for bad character inference under 404(b))
- People v. Penno, 534 P.2d 795 (Colo. 1975) (jury may compare weapons in evidence with witness descriptions to assess identification)
- People v. Spoto, 795 P.2d 1314 (Colo. 1990) (provides 404(b) framework for admission of prior bad acts evidence)