Opinion
No. 25406
Decided February 28, 1972.
Interlocutory appeal by district attorney seeking to reverse order of district court which granted defendants' motions to suppress statements and tangible evidence obtained as result of defendants' arrest for investigation of rape.
Ruling Affirmed
1. CRIMINAL EVIDENCE — Burden of Proof — Probable Cause — Warrantless Arrest — Prosecution. The burden of proving the existence of probable cause for an arrest without a warrant is on the prosecution.
2. ARREST — Warrantless — Prosecution — Failure to Present Evidence — Probable Cause — Unlawful — Inadmissible. Where the prosecution failed to present evidence to support a determination that the warrantless arrests were supported by probable cause, held, under the circumstances trial court ruled properly in holding that the arrests were unlawful and their fruits inadmissible.
Interlocutory Appeal from the District Court of Pueblo County, Honorable Matt J. Kikel, Judge.
Carl Parlapiano, District Attorney, Donald W. Hull, Deputy, for plaintiff-appellant.
Rollie R. Rogers, State Public Defender, J. D. MacFarlane, Chief Deputy, Darol C. Biddle, Deputy, for defendants-appellees.
This interlocutory appeal was brought pursuant to C.A.R. 4.1 by the district attorney of Pueblo County. He seeks to reverse an order of the district court which granted the defendants' motions to suppress statements and tangible evidence obtained as the result of their arrest for investigation of rape. The district court granted the defendants' motions to suppress on the ground that the prosecution failed to sustain its burden of proof by showing that the warrantless arrest were supported by probable cause. We affirm.
[1,2] In People v. Feltch, 174 Colo. 383, 483 P.2d 1335 (1971), we stated that "the burden of proving the existence of probable cause for an arrest without a warrant is on the prosecution." Accord, People v. Valdez, 173 Colo. 410, 480 P.2d 574 (1971). Although the record in this case suggests that the defendants were arrested on the basis of a complaint made by the alleged victim, no evidence of such a complaint or of its contents or the basis for the complaint was presented to the court. The prosecution's failure to present evidence to support a determination that the arrest of the defendants was supported by probable cause left the court with no alternative but to hold that the arrest were unlawful and their fruits inadmissible. People v. Moreno, 176 Colo. 488, 491 P.2d 575 (1971); Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963).
Ruling affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE LEE not participating.