People v. Meraz

5 Citing cases

  1. People v. Randolph

    4 P.3d 477 (Colo. 2000)   Cited 25 times
    Holding two months old information of methamphetamine use to be stale

    Probable cause must exist within the four corners of the affidavit. See People v. Meraz, 961 P.2d 481, 483 (Colo. 1998). When a reviewing court examines a search warrant after the fact to determine if it was valid, the court should assess whether the affidavit provided the magistrate with a "substantial basis" for concluding probable cause existed.

  2. People v. Miller

    75 P.3d 1108 (Colo. 2003)   Cited 31 times
    Holding that month old information of methamphetamine manufacture at the defendant's house was stale

    Whether information is current or stale plays an important role in the totality of the circumstances analysis. See Randolph, 4 P.3d at 482;People v. Meraz, 961 P.2d 481, 484 (Colo. 1998); People v. Hearty, 644 P.2d 302, 311 (Colo. 1982); see also People v. Green, 70 P.3d 1213, 1215 (Colo.

  3. People v. Russom

    107 P.3d 986 (Colo. App. 2005)   Cited 16 times
    Finding that a warrant executed seven days after being obtained was not stale because probable cause continued to exist

    To be constitutionally proper, a search warrant must be based upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation particularly describing the place to be searched and the objects to be seized. People v. Meraz, 961 P.2d 481 (Colo. 1998). Probable cause for a search warrant exists if the affidavit submitted in support of the warrant alleges sufficient facts to cause a person of reasonable caution to believe that contraband or other evidence of criminal activity is located at the place to be searched.

  4. State v. Martinez

    32 P.3d 520 (Colo. App. 2001)   Cited 16 times
    Rejecting the defendant's argument that sentence enhancers became elements of the underlying offense for purpose of merger, and therefore that imposition of consecutive sentences relating to the same victim violated Apprendi

    Probable cause is established when an affidavit submitted in support of a search warrant alleges facts sufficient to cause a person of reasonable caution to believe that contraband or other evidence of criminal activity is located at the place to be searched. The standard for evaluating whether a search warrant complies with constitutional requirements is one of practical accuracy rather than technical nicety, and a description is adequate if the officer executing the warrant can with reasonable effort ascertain and identify the place intended to be searched.People v. Meraz, 961 P.2d 481 (Colo. 1998); People v. Ragulsky, 184 Colo. 86, 518 P.2d 286 (1974). A trial court's finding that there was probable cause to support the issuance of a search warrant is entitled to great deference, and a reviewing court need only determine that a substantial basis existed for the finding.

  5. People v. Young

    987 P.2d 889 (Colo. App. 1999)   Cited 27 times
    Holding that, generally, when "a sentencing court imposes a sentence in the aggravated range based upon two or more factors and at least one of those factors may legitimately be considered by the court and supports the imposition of that sentence, the fact that the court also considered an illegitimate factor will not vitiate that sentence"

    To be constitutionally proper, the issuance of a search warrant must be based upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation particularly describing the place to be searched and the objects to be seized. People v. Meraz, 961 P.2d 481 (Colo. 1998). Probable cause for a search warrant exists if the affidavit submitted in support of the warrant alleges sufficient facts to cause a person of reasonable caution to believe that contraband or other evidence of criminal activity is located at the place to be searched.