Opinion ID: 2823794
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Purpose of Alternate Suspect Evidence

Text: Â¶28Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The relevance and probative value of alternate suspect evidence must be examined in light of the purpose such evidence serves. In a criminal prosecution, identity is a material element of any charged crime. See People v. Rath, 44 P.3d 1033, 1040 (Colo. 2002); see also Salazar, Â¶ 15, 272 P.3d at 1071 (observing that identity is an element of the charged offense that the prosecution must prove). That is, theÂ prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant (as opposed to someone else) committed the charged crime. Â¶29Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Alternate suspect evidence seeks to cast reasonable doubt on the material element of identity. In other words, evidence indicating that someone else committed the crime tends to make the defendantâs identity as the perpetrator less probable and, thus, creates reasonable doubt as to the defendantâs guilt. 5 Â¶30Â Â Â Â Â Â Â A defendant might seek to present one or more forms of evidence suggesting that an alternate suspect committed the crime. Among other things, the defendant might seek to show that someone else: had a motive to commit the crime; had an opportunity to commit the crime; confessed to the crime or otherwise engaged in behavior indicating his involvement; is linked to physical evidence of the crime; or committed similar acts or crimes. All such evidence seeks to tie the alternate suspect to the charged crime, thus casting reasonable doubt on the identity of the defendant as the perpetrator of the charged crime.