People v. Chacon

Supreme Court of Colorado

People v. Chacon

494 P.2d 79, 177 Colo. 368, 1972 Colo. LEXIS 926

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedFebruary 28, 1972

Docket25406

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 494 P.2d 79 (People v. Chacon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Chacon, 494 P.2d 79, 177 Colo. 368, 1972 Colo. LEXIS 926 (Colo. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

*369 Per Curiam

This interlocutory appeal was brought pursuant to C.A.R. 4.1 by the district attorney of Pueblo County. He seeks to reverse an order of the district court which granted the defendants’ motions to suppress statements and tangible evidence obtained as the result of their arrest for investigation of rape. The district court granted the defendants’ motions to suppress on the ground that the prosecution failed to sustain its burden of proof by showing that the warrantless arrests were supported by probable cause. We affirm.

In People v. Feltch, 174 Colo. 383, 483 P.2d 1335 (1971), we stated that “[t]he burden of proving the existence of probable cause for an arrest without a warrant is on the prosecution.” Accord, People v. Valdez, 173 Colo. 410, 480 P.2d 574 (1971). Although the record in this case suggests that the defendants were arrested on the basis of a complaint made by the alleged victim, no evidence of such a complaint or of its contents or the basis for the complaint was presented to the court. The prosecution’s failure to present evidence to support a determination that the arrest of the defendants was supported by probable cause left the court with no alternative but to hold that the arrests were unlawful and their fruits inadmissible. People v. Moreno, 176 Colo. 488, 491 P.2d 575 (1971); Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963).

Ruling affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE LEE not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

*369 Per Curiam

This interlocutory appeal was brought pursuant to C.A.R. 4.1 by the district attorney of Pueblo County. He seeks to reverse an order of the district court which granted the defendants’ motions to suppress statements and tangible evidence obtained as the result of their arrest for investigation of rape. The district court granted the defendants’ motions to suppress on the ground that the prosecution failed to sustain its burden of proof by showing that the warrantless arrests were supported by probable cause. We affirm.

In People v. Feltch, 174 Colo. 383, 483 P.2d 1335 (1971), we stated that “[t]he burden of proving the existence of probable cause for an arrest without a warrant is on the prosecution.” Accord, People v. Valdez, 173 Colo. 410, 480 P.2d 574 (1971). Although the record in this case suggests that the defendants were arrested on the basis of a complaint made by the alleged victim, no evidence of such a complaint or of its contents or the basis for the complaint was presented to the court. The prosecution’s failure to present evidence to support a determination that the arrest of the defendants was supported by probable cause left the court with no alternative but to hold that the arrests were unlawful and their fruits inadmissible. People v. Moreno, 176 Colo. 488, 491 P.2d 575 (1971); Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963).

Ruling affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE LEE not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

494 P.2d 79, 177 Colo. 368, 1972 Colo. LEXIS 926, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-chacon-colo-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack