People v. Vecellio
2012 COA 40
Colo. Ct. App.2012Background
- Vecellio used Adult Friend Finder to contact an undercover officer posing as Karina; Shayla did not exist.
- He talked about incest with Karina’s daughter and indicated interest in a threesome, while questioning Karina’s status as a cop.
- Over weeks, Vecellio discussed Karina and Shayla’s sexual activities, shared photos, and planned to meet, including condom use.
- Vecellio drove from Colorado Springs to Penrose to meet Karina; police arrested him at a store after finding condoms.
- Charges included conspiracy, solicitation, attempt, and enticement; Vecellio claimed he was conducting a secret undercover investigation and had no authorization.
- Trial proceeded with conviction on all counts; Vecellio testified to his undercover theory and lack of training or authorization.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conspiracy standard and unilateral vs bilateral approach | Vecellio argues conspiracy requires two true co-conspirators | Vecellio argues Colorado uses bilateral approach like Barboa | Colorado adopts unilateral approach; conviction sustained |
| Plain error in complicity jury instruction | Instruction error undermines fairness since no principal actor | No reversible plain error | No plain error; convictions upheld |
| Sufficiency of enticement conviction with non-existent victim | Enticement allows conviction if actor believes victim under 15 | No real victim; theory fails | Conviction supported under principal or complicitor theories |
| Admission of character evidence during cross-examination | Evidence admissible under relevance, not 404(b) | Evidence prejudicial under CRE 404(b) | No reversible error; harmless or non-prejudicial overall |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Sprouse, 983 P.2d 771 (Colo. 1999) (sufficiency standard of review for evidence)
- People v. Phong Le, 74 P.3d 431 (Colo.App. 2003) (conspiracy and overt acts; standard for conspiracy)
- State v. John, 328 N.W.2d 190 (Neb. 1982) (unilateral conspiracy approach)
- State v. Heitman, 629 N.W.2d 542 (Neb. 2001) (unilateral conspiracy with feigning conspirator)
- United States v. Barboa, 777 F.2d 1420 (10th Cir. 1985) (federal bilateral conspiracy rejected in favor of unilateral)
- Miller v. State, 955 P.2d 892 (Wyo. 1998) (unilateral conspiracy adopted in several states)