Opinion ID: 2521657
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Probable Cause and Standard of Review

Text: The United States and Colorado Constitutions prohibit issuance of a search warrant without a showing of probable cause supported by oath or affidavit. See U.S. Const. amend. IV; Colo. Const. art. II, § 7. `Probable cause exists when an affidavit for a search warrant alleges facts sufficient to cause a person of reasonable caution to believe that contraband or evidence of criminal activity is located at the place to be searched.' People v. Randolph, 4 P.3d 477, 481 (Colo.2000) (quoting People v. Turcotte-Schaeffer, 843 P.2d 658, 659-60 (Colo.1993)). Probable cause is determined by the totality of the circumstances. Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238-39, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983); People v. Pacheco, 175 P.3d 91, 94 (Colo.2006). Under the Colorado Constitution, the facts supporting probable cause must be reduced to a writing, and so probable cause must be established within the four corners of the warrant or its supporting affidavit. See Colo. Const. art. II, § 7; People v. Padilla, 182 Colo. 101, 105, 511 P.2d 480, 482 (1973). However, the analysis is not governed by hypertechnical legal rules; rather, a judge must make a practical, commonsense decision as to whether there is a fair probability that a search will reveal contraband or evidence of a crime. Pacheco, 175 P.3d at 94; see also People v. Crippen, 223 P.3d 114, 117 (Colo.2010) (`[P]robable cause' itself need not satisfy any rigid, hypertechnical requirements but is a `practical, nontechnical conception,' involving common-sense conclusions about human behavior. (quoting Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238-39, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983))). When reviewing a suppression order, the trial court's factual findings are afforded deference while its legal conclusions are reviewed de novo. See Pacheco, 175 P.3d at 94. Absent a factual dispute, we need only determine whether the trial court applied the correct legal standards and reached proper conclusions of constitutional law under the totality of the circumstances. Id. (citing People v. Kirk, 103 P.3d 918, 921 (Colo.2005)). Specifically, we must surmise whether the affidavit here contained sufficient information to support a finding of probable cause to issue a valid search warrant. Randolph, 4 P.3d at 481. In doing so, we credit the magistrate's determination and assess whether the affidavit provided the magistrate with a substantial basis for concluding probable cause existed. People v. Pate, 878 P.2d 685, 690 (Colo.1994); see also People v. Gutierrez, 222 P.3d 925, 937 (Colo. 2009) (In reviewing the validity of a search warrant, we accord a magistrate's probable-cause determination great deference, but that deference is not boundless. (internal quotations omitted)).