People v. Hemenover
| Decision Date | 08 February 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 24952,24952 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Ray HEMENOVER, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Robert R. Gallagher, Jr., Dist. Atty., James F. Macrum, Jr., Deputy Dist. Atty., Littleton, for plaintiff-appellee.
Rollie R. Rogers, Public Defender, Denver, John E. Myles, Deputy Public Defender, Littleton, for defendant-appellant.
This interlocutory appeal is brought pursuant to C.A.R. 4.1. Richard Hemenover, the defendant, seeks reversal of an adverse ruling by the trial court on his motion to suppress evidence. The motion to suppress is based on the allegation that the arrest was unlawful. Thus, the only issue for our determination is whether under the facts of this case there was probable cause to arrest. Our review of the record indicates that it amply supports the trial court in its conclusion that there was probable cause to arrest and we therefore affirm the ruling of the trial court.
The facts leading up to the arrest are as follows: Detectives Gigikos and Corbin of the Aurora Police Department, at the time of this arrest, were involved in narcotic investigations and surveillances. On several occasions prior to the incident in question, Mr. Livingston, the owner of the Tastee-Freez Store at 1430 Chambers Road, had informed the Police Department that he suspected heavy narcotics activity in and around the Tastee-Freez Store. Also, during the school year, information had been relayed to the Police Department concerning heavy drug activity in this area. The Tastee-Freez is approximately three blocks from Aurora Hinkley High School.
On June 2, 1970, Detective Gigikos and Detective Corbin drove to the Tastee-Freez in Detective Gigikos' personal automobile. Upon arriving there, they purchased soft drinks and began to observe persons in the area. Detective Gigikos had on several prior occasions spoken to Mr. Livingston concerning drug transactions occurring on the premises of the Tastee-Freez property. Detective Corbin had been advised by an informant three days prior to June 2, 1970, that narcotics were being dispensed in large amounts at the Tastee-Freez Store. Approximately ten minutes after the detectives arrived, they observed a red Ford Falcon sedan drive up to the Tastee-Freez Store parking area. The driver parked the car in such a manner that both officers had a clear view of the front and left side of the car. The detectives observed two girls of high school age get out of the car and walk to a nearby U-Totem Store. A few minutes later the girls returned to the Falcon. Within a minute or two after the girls had returned to the Falcon, the detectives noticed a young man approach the car on foot and walk up to the driver's side of the vehicle. Detective Gigikos recognized the young man as Richard Ray Hemenover.
The detective stated that in October of 1968, he had received information from a confidential informant to the effect that Hemenover was engaged in the selling of dangerous drugs out of the Hoffman Heights Pharmacy where he was then employed. After receiving this information, the detective had obtained a picture of Mr Hemenover from the school annual and had since that time observed Mr. Hemenover personally.
The detectives observed Mr. Hemenover talk to the driver of the Falcon for a few seconds, reach into his left front pants pocket and pull out a paper or foil wrapped package approximately one-half inch across, which appeared to the detectives to be a tablet wrapped in paper or foil. They recognized this as being a common method of wrapping LSD tablets.
Both detectives had had prior experience in dealing with narcotic drug cases and Detective Corbin also based his recognition of such packaging of LSD on his schooling in narcotics and drugs as a member of the Aurora Police Department.
Mr. Hemenover handed the package to the driver of the Ford Falcon and the driver in return handed something to Mr. Hemenover. Both detectives testified that based on their experience in narcotic and drug cases, this appeared to them to be a sale of a drug. At that point, the detectives got out of their car and ran over to the Falcon...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Severson
...v. Glasener, Colo., 550 P.2d 851 (1976). Different standards govern observations by experienced peace officers. See People v. Hemenover, 173 Colo. 501, 480 P.2d 549 (1971). That the possible origin of the object seen transferred was a plastic bag lends little, if any, weight to the postulat......
-
Baker v. People
...issues of fact. It is the function of the trial court and not the reviewing court to weigh the evidence and make a finding. People v. Hemenover, Colo., 480 P.2d 549; People v. Kelley, 172 Colo. 39, 470 P.2d 32. The finding here is amply supported by competent evidence which, if believed, co......