People v. Martinez
| Decision Date | 29 October 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 26343,26343 |
| Citation | 527 P.2d 534,186 Colo. 388 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Earnest Alois MARTINEZ et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Robert R. Gallagher, Jr., Dist. Atty., C. Scott Crabtree, Deputy Dist. Atty., Littleton, for plaintiff-appellant.
No appearance for defendants-appellees.
Defendants are charged with possession of marijuana and possession for sale of marijuana (C.R.S.1963, 48--5--2, and 1971 Perm.Supp., C.R.S.1963, 48--5--20). The trial court granted their motion to suppress the introduction of marijuana taken from a car in which they were riding. The People have brought this interlocutory appeal pursuant to C.A.R. 4.1. We affirm.
Two Colorado State Patrol officers, while patrolling on Interstate 70 west of Byers, noticed a car with a 'hanging' Wyoming license plate and a defective tail light. They stopped the car. The driver, defendant Martinez, got out of the vehicle and walked back toward the police car. One of the officers informed him of the defects and advised him to correct them.
One of the officers asked Martinez for his drivers license and vehicle registration. Martinez produced his license and the title to the car. Martinez testified as follows concerning what then transpired: Martinez told the officer that he did not have the registration, but merely the title. One of the officers asked Martinez what he had in the trunk and he responded that he had some tire chains. The officer asked for permission to inspect the trunk of the car, and Martinez refused to grant it. The car keys were lying on the front seat next to Martinez. The officer reached across Martinez, took the keys, used them to open the trunk and there found the marijuana.
The testimony of the officers is quite divergent from that of Martinez but it is not necessary for us to relate it.
In an opinion in this matter announced on July 1, 1974, we noted that the trial court had made no findings and we remanded the case to it for the purpose of making findings of fact. The matter is now returned here with findings made by the court as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Lowe
...that would involve him in the homicide. This finding was supported by the record and will not be disturbed on review. People v. Martinez, 186 Colo. 388, 527 P.2d 534 (1974). Accordingly, we find that under the standards enunciated in Rhode Island v. Innis, supra, the detective's initial que......
-
People v. Boileau
...finding that the events had not been staged is supported by the evidence and that finding of fact is binding on review. See People v. Martinez, Colo., 527 P.2d 534. At the suppression hearing, the trial court found that the initial intrusion by Officer Lewark, when he fully opened the door ......
-
People v. Glazier
...of that finding, this court is in no position to substitute its judgment for that of the judge who issued that warrant. People v. Martinez, Colo., 527 P.2d 534. Also, as stated in Commonwealth v. Cromer, Mass., 313 N.E.2d 557 (1974), where the issue was delay between issuance of a search wa......
-
People v. DeLeon, 80SA97
...inferences to be drawn from the criminal docket sheets. Findings of fact so supported cannot be disturbed on review. People v. Martinez, 186 Colo. 388, 527 P.2d 534 (1974). The trial court's conclusions are correct based upon those The judgment of conviction is affirmed. 1 Although the defe......