Court Opinion

ID: 9606092
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 02:46:45.043012+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:32.546414
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE ERICKSON
specially concurring:
The result reached by the majority is wholly consistent with the dictates of the Fourth Amendment. In my view, however, Stone v. People, 174 Colo. 504, 485 P.2d 495 (1971), as it has developed through its progeny, provides a constitutionally invalid basis for making a stop for the purpose of requiring identification. See People v. Taylor, 190 Colo. 144, 544 P.2d 392 (1975) (Erickson, J. dissenting); People v. Montoya, 190 Colo. 11, 543 P.2d 514 (1975) (Erickson, J. dissenting); People v. *500Mathis, 189 Colo. 534, 542 P.2d 1296 (1975) (Erickson, J. dissenting); People v. Cruz, 186 Colo. 295, 526 P.2d 1315 (1974) (Erickson, J. dissenting); People v. Montoya, 185 Colo. 299, 524 P.2d 76 (1974) (Erickson, J. dissenting); People v. Stevens, 183 Colo. 399, 517 P.2d 1336 (1974) (Erickson, J. dissenting), rev’d sub nom Stevens v. Wilson, 534 F.2d 867 (10th Cir. 1976); People v. Marquez, 183 Colo. 231, 516 P.2d 1134 (1973) (Erickson, J. dissenting); People v. Gurule, 175 Colo. 512, 488 P.2d 889 (1971) (Erickson, J. dissenting).
The Supreme Court of the United States has placed stringent restrictions on investigative stops based on less than probable cause. See Brown v. Texas, 443 U.S. 47, 99 S.Ct. 2637, 61 L.Ed.2d 357 (1979); Michigan v. DeFillippo, _U.S. _, 99 S.Ct. 2627, 61 L.Ed.2d 343 (1979); Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 99 S.Ct. 1391, 59 L.Ed.2d 660 (1979). See also, Dunaway v. New York, 442 U.S. 200, 99 S.Ct. 2248, 60 L.Ed.2d 824 (1979). Serious doubt exists as to the viability of the “Stone Stop” in those instances where the stop is not supported by a reasonable and articulable suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed by the individual stopped.
The facts in this case establish that an arrest was in fact made. An arrest, if it is to meet constitutional muster, must be based on probable cause. People v. Bates, 190 Colo. 291, 546 P.2d 491 (1976).
I concur in the majority’s conclusion that an arrest occurred and that the consequent seizure of items located in the truck was invalid.