Zesch v. People

Supreme Court of Colorado

Zesch v. People

409 P.2d 522, 159 Colo. 19

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedJanuary 10, 1966

DocketNo. 21366

StatusPublished

This text of 409 P.2d 522 (Zesch v. People) 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

Zesch v. People, 409 P.2d 522, 159 Colo. 19 (Colo. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Pringle

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a search and seizure case. The Attorney General confesses that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence the fruits of the search and points out that the search warrant in issue here is constitutionally [20]*20invalid under the express language of Hernandez v. People, 153 Colo. 316, 385 P.2d 996, and Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 Sup. Ct. 1509, 12 L. Ed.2d 723. We agree. The search warrant was obtained upon an affidavit based on testimony of a policeman whose only source of information was a telephone call to the police department by a person who refused to give his name. Such an affidavit does not meet the constitutional requirement set forth in Hernandez and Aguilar, supra.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein expressed.

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

Mr. Chief Justice Pringle

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a search and seizure case. The Attorney General confesses that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence the fruits of the search and points out that the search warrant in issue here is constitutionally [20]*20invalid under the express language of Hernandez v. People, 153 Colo. 316, 385 P.2d 996, and Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 Sup. Ct. 1509, 12 L. Ed.2d 723. We agree. The search warrant was obtained upon an affidavit based on testimony of a policeman whose only source of information was a telephone call to the police department by a person who refused to give his name. Such an affidavit does not meet the constitutional requirement set forth in Hernandez and Aguilar, supra.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein expressed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

409 P.2d 522, 159 Colo. 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zesch-v-people-colo-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack