People v. Rankin, No. 26562

Docket NºNo. 26562
Citation554 P.2d 1107, 191 Colo. 508
Case DateSeptember 07, 1976
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

Page 1107

554 P.2d 1107
191 Colo. 508
The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Steve RANKIN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 26562.
Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.
Sept. 7, 1976.
As Modified On Denial of Rehearing Sept. 27, 1976.

J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Jean E. Dubofsky, Deputy Atty. Gen., Robert C. Lehnert, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.

[191 Colo. 509] Miller & Gray, P.C., Robert Bruce Miller, Boulder, for defendant-appellant.

ERICKSON, Justice.

The defendant, Steve Rankin, was charged and convicted by a jury of dispensing dangerous drugs. C.R.S.1963, 48--8--2. 1 The primary issue on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction. The record establishes that the prosecution failed to established the Corpus delicti. Therefore, the defendant's motion for a judgment of acquittal should have been granted.

The defendant, who was 18 years of age and attended high school with the other witnesses to the transaction, was arrested after Jeffrey Lebsack ingested two pieces of a blotter and suffered an increase in blood preassure, rapid pulse, and dilation of his eyes. The symptoms which accompanied Lebsack's objective signs were loss

Page 1108

of memory, increased sensitivity to light, and dizziness. As a result, Lebsack told his father that he had taken LSD which he obtained from Mark Willey. The father took his son to the Loveland Hospital where a general surgeon conducted an examination and measured Lebsack's vital signs. The surgeon had no experience with hallucinogenic drugs, but administered a tranquillizer and caused Lebsack's condition to stabilize and return to normal.

Subsequently, Willey was arrested and provided evidence which implicated the defendant. Willey was granted immunity and testified for the prosecution. His testimony, together with that of the doctor, Lebsack, the sheriff, and an agent from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, constituted the prosecution's case.

In essence, the prosecution proved that the defendant had on two occasions given Willey a pill. One pill was described as a 'purple band.' Willey used that pill, together with another unidentified pill which he got from someone else, and thereafter experienced hallucinations. The second pill, which he obtained from Rankin and was said to be LSD, was melted down by Willey and put on two pieces of blotter paper. The blotter paper was then put in a bottle with eight other pieces of blotter paper. The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • People v. LaRosa, No. 11SC664.
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • February 11, 2013
    ...is from 1872. See Dougherty v. People, 1 Colo. 514, 524 (1872). Since then, we have consistently applied this rule. See People v. Rankin, 191 Colo. 508, 510, 554 P.2d 1107, 1108 (1976); People v. Smith, 182 Colo. 31, 33, 510 P.2d 893, 894 (1973); Meredith v. People, 152 Colo. 69, 71, 380 P.......
  • People v. LaRosa, Supreme Court Case No. 11SC664
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • January 14, 2013
    ...is from 1872. See Dougherty v. People, 1 Colo. 514, 524 (1872). Since then, we have consistently applied this rule. See People v. Rankin,191 Colo. 508, 510, 554 P.2d 1107, 1108 (1976); People v. Smith, 182 Colo. 31, 33, 510 P.2d 893, 894 (1973); Meredith v. People, 152 Colo. 69, 71, 380 P.2......
  • People v. Crawford, No. 26439
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • September 7, 1976
    ...to Page 830 the degrees of homicide, are read and considered together as a whole, they clearly set forth the elements of the respective [191 Colo. 508] offenses charged. The language of the voluntary and the involuntary manslaughter instructions clearly indicates that voluntary manslaughter......
  • People v. Quinn, No. 88CA1086
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • February 1, 1990
    ...single confession of the defendant, that confession must be corroborated by evidence independent of the confession. See People v. Rankin, 191 Colo. 508, 554 P.2d 1107 (1972); People v. Smith, 182 Colo. 31, 510 P.2d 893 However, only slight corroborating evidence is needed. See Self v. Peopl......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • People v. LaRosa, No. 11SC664.
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • February 11, 2013
    ...is from 1872. See Dougherty v. People, 1 Colo. 514, 524 (1872). Since then, we have consistently applied this rule. See People v. Rankin, 191 Colo. 508, 510, 554 P.2d 1107, 1108 (1976); People v. Smith, 182 Colo. 31, 33, 510 P.2d 893, 894 (1973); Meredith v. People, 152 Colo. 69, 71, 380 P.......
  • People v. LaRosa, Supreme Court Case No. 11SC664
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • January 14, 2013
    ...is from 1872. See Dougherty v. People, 1 Colo. 514, 524 (1872). Since then, we have consistently applied this rule. See People v. Rankin,191 Colo. 508, 510, 554 P.2d 1107, 1108 (1976); People v. Smith, 182 Colo. 31, 33, 510 P.2d 893, 894 (1973); Meredith v. People, 152 Colo. 69, 71, 380 P.2......
  • People v. Crawford, No. 26439
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court of Colorado
    • September 7, 1976
    ...to Page 830 the degrees of homicide, are read and considered together as a whole, they clearly set forth the elements of the respective [191 Colo. 508] offenses charged. The language of the voluntary and the involuntary manslaughter instructions clearly indicates that voluntary manslaughter......
  • People v. Quinn, No. 88CA1086
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals of Colorado
    • February 1, 1990
    ...single confession of the defendant, that confession must be corroborated by evidence independent of the confession. See People v. Rankin, 191 Colo. 508, 554 P.2d 1107 (1972); People v. Smith, 182 Colo. 31, 510 P.2d 893 However, only slight corroborating evidence is needed. See Self v. Peopl......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT