2013 COA 40
Colo. Ct. App.2013Background
- Iversen was convicted by jury of attempting to introduce marijuana concentrate into a detention facility under 18-8-208(1)(a).
- Defendant had a doctor’s certificate recommending medical marijuana and purchased marijuana concentrate (Garlic Butter) from Nature’s Alternative while in a community corrections facility.
- The jar of concentrate was seized by facility officials after he returned from the doctor visit.
- The prosecutor moved in limine to exclude evidence of the doctor’s appointment.
- The trial court excluded the doctor’s certificate and evidence of the appointment, and the defense theory evolved around entrapment and lack of knowledge of illegality.
- The jury found Iversen guilty and the court sentenced him to 90 days’ incarceration, four years of probation, and 600 hours of community service.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether excluding the doctor's certificate violated the right to present a defense | Iversen argues exclusion impinged defense rights. | Iversen contends evidence would show readiness to follow rules and negate guilt. | No reversible error; exclusion permissible if evidence is not legally relevant. |
| What mental state is required under 18-8-208(1)(a) for contraband introduction | People argues the statute requires knowledge of unlawfulness. | Iversen argues knowledge of illegality is also required. | The statute requires only knowledge of introducing contraband, not knowledge of illegality. |
| Whether prosecutorial misconduct or plain error occurred in closing | Prosecutor misled jury by misstating law and denigrating defense. | Defense asserts improper argument violated fairness. | No plain error; arguments did not deprive defendant of a fair trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Holmes, 959 P.2d 406 (Colo.1998) (sets standard on scienter and knowledge in criminal statutes)
- Oram v. People, 255 P.3d 1032 (Colo.2011) (discusses knowledge element across burglary statute)
- People v. Bossert, 722 P.2d 998 (Colo.1986) (construction of culpable mental state elements)
- Walden v. People, 224 P.3d 369 (Colo.App.2009) (discusses knowledge of unlawfulness in similar contexts)
- Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (U.S.1991) (ignorance of the law not a defense unless statute permits)
- People v. Ryan, 605 N.Y.S.2d 235 (N.Y.1993) (illustrates independent meaning of unlawfully in similar statutes)