2020 CO 65
Colo.2020Background:
- At ~3:00 a.m. Deputy Chapman observed a Subaru turn from Highway 69 onto remote County Road 525 and followed; Chapman had never seen traffic there at that hour.
- The Subaru took a two-track onto private property, parked beside a stock tank and windmill, and turned off its headlights.
- Chapman radioed two deputies; as he approached, the driver turned the headlights back on, shifted into reverse, and began backing; Chapman then activated emergency lights and stopped the vehicle.
- Deputies observed a white crystalline substance on the dashboard and a bag protruding from Wheeler’s shoe; Wheeler admitted possession; searches recovered ~38.5 grams meth and $4,700 cash.
- Wheeler moved to suppress; the district court granted suppression, finding insufficient reasonable and articulable suspicion; the People filed an interlocutory appeal.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Wheeler) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether deputies had reasonable and articulable suspicion to stop the Subaru | Totality of circumstances (time, remote location, entry onto private property, parked by stock tank/windmill, lights off then evasive backing) justified suspicion of poaching/tampering | Unusual turn onto County Road 525 at 3 a.m. alone is insufficient; facts permit innocent explanations | Reversed: court held the combined facts and reasonable inferences supplied reasonable and articulable suspicion |
| Whether extrinsic corroborating evidence was required to credit the officer’s poaching/tampering concerns | Officer testimony and circumstances suffice; no requirement for additional external reports or calls | District court erred in discounting the stop for lack of extrinsic corroboration | Held: Supreme Court rejected a rule requiring extrinsic corroboration and accepted credible officer testimony under the totality of circumstances |
| Whether the deputies’ initial follow constituted a Fourth Amendment seizure | The chase/observation prior to activating emergency equipment was not a seizure; seizure occurred when emergency lights were activated and vehicle was stopped | Argued the stop lacked adequate suspicion when viewed at the moment interception began | Held: Pursuit before show of authority was not a seizure; relevant facts include those known at the time the stop occurred (when emergency equipment was activated) |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishing reasonable suspicion standard for investigative stops)
- Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (People bear burden to justify investigatory stop)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (evasive behavior is a pertinent factor for reasonable suspicion)
- California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (pursuit without show of authority is not a seizure)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (totality-of-the-circumstances approach; innocent behavior can contribute to probable cause)
- Immigration & Naturalization Serv. v. Delgado, 466 U.S. 210 (distinguishing permissible police encounters from Fourth Amendment seizures)