The People of Colorado v. Pedro Rodriguez

Denver, Colorado criminal defense lawyer represented Defendant charged with drug possession and obstruction of a police officer.



* * *





¶ 5 The charges against Rodriguez arose from a traffic stop. Rodriguez was a passenger in a car stopped by Officer Chase Gardner.



¶ 6 At some point during the stop, Rodriguez jumped out of the car and ran along the side of the highway. By then, two other officers had arrived to assist with the stop. Officer Gardner and another officer gave chase, and, during the pursuit, Rodriguez threw down a small plastic bag containing a white powdery substance. The officers quickly caught up to Rodriguez and, after they arrested him, Officer Gardner recovered the bag Rodriguez had discarded.



¶ 7 At trial, the prosecution sought to establish that the substance in the plastic bag recovered from the scene was the same substance that a chemist tested and determined was cocaine. Officer Gardner testified that, after he retrieved the bag from the ground, he gave it to Sergeant David Manzanilla at the scene. Officer Gardner described the bag as a "small, clear bag that had a white, powdery substance in it." After giving the bag to Sergeant Manzanilla, Officer Gardner did not see the bag again until he purportedly identified it at trial.



¶ 8 Over defense counsel's "chain of custody" objection, the prosecutor showed Officer Gardner Exhibit 1, a Colorado Springs Police Department (CSPD) evidence bag, and asked Officer Gardner to identify it. Officer Gardner testified that Exhibit 1 contained "[t]he substance I observed in the bag [at the scene]."2



¶ 9 Later, the police chemist testified that he picked up Exhibit 1 from the CSPD evidence section. Exhibit 1 was sealed when he received it. He did not know "who placed the item[ ] in evidence" or where the item "had been prior to" the time he picked it up for



[508 P.3d 281]



testing. The chemist weighed and tested the substance contained in the exhibit bag and determined that it was approximately twenty-eight grams of cocaine. Then he resealed the bag with blue tape, "dated it," "marked it with the case number, item number, and [his] initials," and returned it to the evidence section.



¶ 10 Sergeant Manzanilla did not testify. Rodriguez contends that, as a result, the prosecution failed to establish a sufficient chain of custody for the white powder found at the scene and, therefore, Exhibit 1 was not properly authenticated and should not have been admitted.

People v. Rodriguez, 2022 COA 11, 508 P.3d 276 (Colo. App. 2022)



* * *





¶ 43 In closing argument, the prosecutor attempted to explain the mental state of "knowingly," which applied to both charges:



Element number 3. Knowingly. This is a mental state, that has a precise legal definition that the Judge read to you.



....



A person is acting knowingly when they are aware of what they are doing, as opposed to say, sleep walking. When you are sleep walking you are not aware of what you are doing, because you are asleep.



But in this case the defendant was aware of what he was doing. He was awake, and he knew what he was doing. And a lot of the evidence in this case goes to show it.



He pulled over. The officer asked him for his ID, he hands him his ID. He asks him for registration, and he is looking for the registration. He was awake, he was aware, he knew what was going on. That element number 3 has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.



Rodriguez argues that the prosecutor's comments misstated the law by equating a knowing mens rea with mere voluntary conduct.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.