People v. Williams, 26065
| Decision Date | 12 August 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 26065,26065 |
| Citation | 525 P.2d 463,186 Colo. 72 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Loretta Ann WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
John P. Moore, Atty. Gen., John E. Bush, Deputy Atty. Gen., Patricia W. Robb, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.
Rollie R. Rogers, Colorado State Public Defender, James F. Dumas, Jr., Chief Deputy State Public Defender, E. David Griffith, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, for defendant-appellant.
Loretta Ann Williams appeals her conviction of possession of a narcotic drug (heroin) with intent to sell in violation of C.R.S.1963, 48--5--20(1)(b). The sole issue is whether the arresting officers, acting on tips from anonymous and unknown informants, had probable cause to arrest appellant. We hold the arrest was without probable cause, and therefore conclude that the trial court should have suppressed statements obtained from appellant and evidence seized from her person subsequent to the arrest. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of conviction and remand for a new trial.
The testimony at the suppression hearing reveals that appellant's arrest was predicated solely on the uncorroborated tips of unknown informants. Prior to her arrest, the Colorado Springs police department received two calls from unknown persons regarding the alleged illegal activities of one Bobby Joe Williams with respect to heroin trafficking--but not appellant's activities. The accusations of these unknown callers never were verified.
On the date of appellant's arrest, two more calls from unknown informants came into the police department. One caller said appellant was making trips to Texas to obtain heroin. The other related that appellant would be returning from Texas that evening with heroin and would be met at the airport by Bobby Joe Williams.
The arresting officers had no known prior contact with these informants; and, moreover, they had had no independent corroboration that a crime was in fact being committed. Nevertheless, acting on this information, they proceeded to the airport and arrested appellant after she arrived at the airport and was met by Williams. On subsequent interrogation at the police station, appellant admitted she had heroin on her person, and a search by a sheriff's matron produced the contraband hidden in appellant's girdle.
Prior to trial, appellant moved to suppress this incriminating evidence. She renewed her motion at the close of the People's case and on motion for new trial. Conceding that it was a 'close question,' the district court nevertheless denied the motion in all three instances.
It is fundamental that an uncorroborated accusation by an informant whose identity and reliability remains untested cannot constitute probable cause. Holbrook v. United States, 406 F.2d 44 (10th Cir.); People v. Feltch, 174 Colo. 383, 483 F.2d 1335. To establish probable cause, it must be demonstrated that, at the time the officer made the arrest, the facts and circumstances within his knowledge and of which he had reasonably trustworthy information were such as to warrant a man of reasonable caution in believing that an offense had been committed or was being committed. People v. Vaughns, Colo., ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Byrd v. People
... ... 14. See, e.g., United States v. Miller, 797 F.2d 336 (6th Cir.1986) ; Arizona v. Williams, 131 Ariz. 211, 639 P.2d 1036 (1982) ... 15. Brunet and several other courts cited here concluded that an application of ... ...
-
People v. Sherbine
...States v. Miles, 425 F.Supp. 1256, 1259 (E.D.Mich.1977); United States v. Pearce, 356 F.Supp. 756 (E.D.Pa.1973); People v. Williams, 186 Colo. 72, 74-75, 525 P.2d 463 (1974); Atkins, supra. See also LaFave, Probable cause from informants: The effects of Murphy's Law on Fourth Amendment adju......
-
People v. Walker
...captor." Id., p. 759.35 Truitt v. State, 505 S.W.2d 594, 595, 597 (Tex.Cr.App., 1974).36 Id., pp. 597-598.37 People v. Williams, 186 Colo. 72, 74-75, 525 P.2d 463, 464-465 (1974).38 State v. Soroka, 112 R.I. 392, 393-394, 311 A.2d 45, 46 (1973).39 Id., p. 395, 311 A.2d p. 46.40 Id., pp. 396......
-
People v. Elliott
... ... inadvertence or otherwise, to cover every evil that might conceivably have been attacked. * * *' ... See also Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471, 90 S.Ct. 1153, 25 L.Ed.2d 491, where the Court stated that in the area of economics and social welfare the Equal Protection Clause is ... ...
-
Using Local Police Powers to Protect the Environment
...234 (Colo. 1974). 17. See People v. Rueda, 649 P.2d 1106 (Colo. 1982); People v. Boileau, 538 P.2d 484 (Colo. 1975); People v. Williams, 525 P.2d 463 (Colo. 1974); Glass v. People, 493 P.2d 1347 (Colo. 1972); People v. Nanes, 483 P.2d 958 (Colo. 1971). 18. See People v. Saars, 584 P.2d 622 ......