The People of the State of Colorado v. Lamonte Xavier Smith , 2022 CO 38 ( 2022 )

<div class="content">
<div class="html-children">
<div><header><center><b></b><p data-paragraph-id="032abacded"><span data-sentence-id="389cba9b32" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="032abacded">2022 CO 38</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="5d1f440327"><span data-sentence-id="02a8fcd426" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5d1f440327"> The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellant <br /> v.</span><span data-sentence-id="991ed02c1e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5d1f440327"> <br /> Lamonte Xavier Smith, Defendant-Appellee </span></p><p data-paragraph-id="5fb31eecd4">No. 22SA58</p><p data-paragraph-id="44f91532a1"><span data-sentence-id="44f91532a1" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="44f91532a1">Supreme Court of Colorado, en banc</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="9b149680de">June 27, 2022</p></center></header><br /><!--OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE-->
<p id="AppealLine" data-paragraph-id="1c0c0b76cd"><span data-sentence-id="c9835a35e4" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1c0c0b76cd"> Interlocutory Appeal from the District Court Mesa County District Court Case No. 20CR1600 Honorable Valerie J. Robison, Judge </span></p>
<p id="Attorney" data-paragraph-id="ba2a9e3852"><span data-sentence-id="c37943e74d" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ba2a9e3852"> Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellant: </span></p>
<p id="Attorney" data-paragraph-id="b357d0da11"><span data-sentence-id="7c7eaec7f5" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="b357d0da11"> Daniel P. Rubinstein, District Attorney, Twenty-First Judicial District </span></p>
<p id="Attorney" data-paragraph-id="cd5dcf3f26"><span data-sentence-id="b638a63333" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="cd5dcf3f26"> George Alan Holley II, Senior Deputy District Attorney </span></p>
<p id="Attorney" data-paragraph-id="25ef397ac9"><span data-sentence-id="64da8ef3f6" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="25ef397ac9"> Grand Junction, Colorado </span></p>
<p id="Attorney" data-paragraph-id="f0ced0dbd2"><span data-sentence-id="48450b7abf" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="f0ced0dbd2"> Attorneys for Defendant-Appellee: </span></p>
<p id="Attorney" data-paragraph-id="eee65f2b48"><span data-sentence-id="37b9195c68" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="eee65f2b48"> Colorado Legal Defense Group </span></p>
<p id="Attorney" data-paragraph-id="6315e64851"> Ethan Ice </p>
<p id="Attorney" data-paragraph-id="ae68f34ede"> Denver, Colorado </p>
<p id="Judge" data-paragraph-id="06c35e5fa9"><span data-sentence-id="e955d72674" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="06c35e5fa9"> JUSTICE SAMOUR delivered the Opinion of the Court, in which CHIEF JUSTICE BOATRIGHT, JUSTICE MÁRQUEZ, JUSTICE HOOD, JUSTICE GABRIEL, JUSTICE HART, and JUSTICE BERKENKOTTER joined.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">1</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p id="MajorityOpinion" data-paragraph-id="3b9a4cc862"> <strong>OPINION</strong> </p>
<p id="MajorityJudge" data-paragraph-id="da7be717ec"> SAMOUR JUSTICE </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="1890b5cdd1"><span data-sentence-id="85e85ef713" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1890b5cdd1"> ¶1 Colorado State Patrol ("CSP") Trooper Christian Bollen had a hunch, and then another hunch, and then another hunch.</span><span data-sentence-id="a0e39add8c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1890b5cdd1"> And he acted on those hunches, despite a circumstance directly undermining them.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"><span data-sentence-id="30c451abde" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> ¶2 While working interstate interdiction, Trooper Bollen observed a Chevrolet Tahoe with out-of-state license plates.</span><span data-sentence-id="14e71a1387" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> After running the license plate number, he discovered that the car was a rental.</span><span data-sentence-id="0882d3e16f" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> Based on the location and direction of travel, the car's rental status, and the out-of-state license plates, he had a hunch that the car might be engaged in the transportation of illegal narcotics.</span><span data-sentence-id="22dbf0ea70" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> After conducting a traffic stop, he spoke privately with the driver, who informed him that she and her passengers were driving from Los Angeles to Maryland.</span><span data-sentence-id="e1c625d5cc" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> But her story about the trip wasn't entirely believable.</span><span data-sentence-id="9a4fc8a9fc" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> Further, she tried to change the conversation, and when Trooper Bollen told her that he suspected she was "smuggling drugs," she became nervous.</span><span data-sentence-id="57cc4d4deb" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> He had a hunch that she was involved in drug trafficking.</span><span data-sentence-id="0375f819d2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> Later, he contacted the three passengers, including the defendant.</span><span data-sentence-id="c64054db48" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> The information they provided didn't match that disclosed by the driver.</span><span data-sentence-id="075ec2df46" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> And the defendant stared at the glove box when Trooper Bollen asked if there was contraband in the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="e99fa9126c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> Trooper Bollen had a hunch that the passengers were in on the transportation of illegal narcotics.</span><span data-sentence-id="bb5be9d639" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="535e046e78"> Notwithstanding a dog sniff around the car that resulted in no alert, Trooper Bollen acted on his hunches and searched the Tahoe with another </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">2</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="ff87cc4962"><span data-sentence-id="cd57ee7125" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ff87cc4962"> trooper's assistance.</span><span data-sentence-id="45eb81fac9" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ff87cc4962"> They seized a kilogram of cocaine from the glove box and some fentanyl in a prescription bottle.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="2c7ab9dfe3"><span data-sentence-id="57758e0779" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2c7ab9dfe3"> ¶3 In this interlocutory appeal brought by the prosecution, the parties agree that Trooper Bollen performed a lawful traffic stop.</span><span data-sentence-id="3e19277d5c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2c7ab9dfe3"> The question before us is whether the district court erred in granting the defendant's motion to suppress on the ground that Trooper Bollen lacked probable cause to search the Tahoe.</span><span data-sentence-id="0483d952a7" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2c7ab9dfe3"> Because probable cause to search is measured against an objective standard of reasonableness and cannot be established by piling hunch upon hunch or by ignoring facts that militate against it, we affirm the district court's order and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="2145c11576"><span data-sentence-id="637efaf2a2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2145c11576"> <strong>I. Facts and Procedural History</strong> </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="a42da9ddbe"><span data-sentence-id="32f64ec4df" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="a42da9ddbe"> ¶4 On the morning of November 20, 2020, Trooper Bollen was sitting in his patrol car at milepost 10 watching eastbound traffic on Interstate 70.</span><span data-sentence-id="106a201301" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="a42da9ddbe"> Trooper Bollen, an eleven-year veteran with the CSP, had been working in the "smuggling, trafficking, and interdiction" section of the CSP for about two and a half years.</span><span data-sentence-id="133d2b01ef" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="a42da9ddbe"> He had received more than 300 hours of training in drug interdiction and had investigated over 100 cases involving the transportation of illegal narcotics.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="c1288bb4eb"><span data-sentence-id="2ec5e66a62" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="c1288bb4eb"> ¶5 From his training and experience, Trooper Bollen had learned that out-of- state rental cars are commonly used in drug trafficking and that drug traffickers often engage in "hard travel"-getting from point A to point B as quickly as </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">3</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="e8969183c7"><span data-sentence-id="eb0c5ed120" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="e8969183c7"> possible-and then return the cars to the original rental location.</span><span data-sentence-id="fc463e27df" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="e8969183c7"> Further, he had become familiar with the pattern of drug trafficking on I-70: Drugs are generally transported from west to east, and the proceeds of the sale of drugs are generally transported from east to west.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="a0fcdc840a"><span data-sentence-id="abd51d84c8" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="a0fcdc840a"> ¶6 At 7:42 a.m., Trooper Bollen observed a black Tahoe driven by a woman.</span><span data-sentence-id="919dc9d77e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="a0fcdc840a"> The car had out-of-state license plates (from Florida), so he decided to follow it.</span><span data-sentence-id="55017af953" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="a0fcdc840a"> When he cleared the license plate number, he discovered that the car was a rental.</span><span data-sentence-id="114b5445c6" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="a0fcdc840a"> He had a hunch that the car might be engaged in the transportation of illegal narcotics.</span><span data-sentence-id="8e078d9571" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="a0fcdc840a"> Because the car was traveling in the left lane for an extended period of time without passing other cars, he initiated a traffic stop.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="762002d1dc"><span data-sentence-id="9e8adde400" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="762002d1dc"> ¶7 There were four individuals inside the Tahoe: the driver, Erica Sagastizado; the front passenger, Lamonte Xavier Smith (the defendant and Sagastizado's boyfriend); and two rear passengers, Charles Smith (the defendant's brother) and Charles Smith's girlfriend, Trinity Adokomola.</span><span data-sentence-id="ca4abe919a" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="762002d1dc"> Trooper Bollen contacted Sagastizado, explained the reason for the stop, and asked to see her driver's license and the rental car agreement.</span><span data-sentence-id="d6d4412b12" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="762002d1dc"> She handed him her Maryland driver's license and the rental car agreement.</span><span data-sentence-id="972defcfc8" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="762002d1dc"> As he looked over the documents, he realized that the car had been rented in Los Angeles.</span><span data-sentence-id="29f7079fb8" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="762002d1dc"> Trooper Bollen was aware that Los Angeles is a well-known source of narcotics.</span><span data-sentence-id="be4fdb1ea2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="762002d1dc"> He told Sagastizado that he was not going to issue her a citation, but he asked her if she would be willing to go back to his patrol </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">4</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="403cf11da4"><span data-sentence-id="6d14fe5a44" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="403cf11da4"> car to talk with him while he ran her information through his agency's database.</span><span data-sentence-id="e4d9aca701" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="403cf11da4"> Sagastizado agreed to do so.</span><span data-sentence-id="4cfe92e57d" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="403cf11da4"> Since it was chilly, he asked her if she wanted to sit inside the patrol car, and she took him up on his offer.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="5aee2d5c18"><span data-sentence-id="9f982a6508" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5aee2d5c18"> ¶8 While running Sagastizado's information, Trooper Bollen asked her numerous questions, including how long she'd lived in the Maryland area, where she was coming from, where she was headed, how the passengers knew each other, how everyone got to Los Angeles, when they arrived in Los Angeles, what time they started driving, where they were going next, when they planned to arrive at their destination, and what landmarks they had seen or planned to see.</span><span data-sentence-id="abdb29df1b" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5aee2d5c18"> Sagastizado was cooperative.</span><span data-sentence-id="65509fe165" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5aee2d5c18"> She said that they had flown to Los Angeles from Maryland and were in the process of driving back to Maryland.</span><span data-sentence-id="6f5016e1c8" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5aee2d5c18"> According to Sagastizado, they had chosen driving as their mode of transportation for their return trip so that they could do some sightseeing.</span><span data-sentence-id="cf2a52ef0e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5aee2d5c18"> She said that they had left Los Angeles around 6 or 7 p.m. the previous evening and had stopped to see the Grand Canyon.</span><span data-sentence-id="b1c3eee378" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5aee2d5c18"> However, she couldn't name any other landmarks they had seen or were planning to see.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="b3c10984fc"><span data-sentence-id="f678c62f14" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="b3c10984fc"> ¶9 Trooper Bollen told Sagastizado that he'd grown up in the Los Angeles area and visited there regularly, so he was familiar with the route she was on and how long it took to drive from Los Angeles to the location of the stop.</span><span data-sentence-id="94a32874ad" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="b3c10984fc"> He expressed skepticism about the information she'd provided, explaining that there was no </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">5</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="00ef678b05"><span data-sentence-id="0e50eeaa37" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="00ef678b05"> way she could have driven from Los Angeles to the Grand Canyon and then to their current location in eleven to twelve hours.</span><span data-sentence-id="c901d25bcd" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="00ef678b05"> Sagastizado responded that they had simply driven past the Grand Canyon and that it was also possible that the canyon they had visited was just a canyon and not the Grand Canyon.</span><span data-sentence-id="04fb410b9c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="00ef678b05"> She then tried to change the subject, which Trooper Bollen took as an attempt to divert his attention from the details of the trip.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="5d3337ff4b"><span data-sentence-id="191d36b420" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5d3337ff4b"> ¶10 Other information provided by Sagastizado raised additional red flags.</span><span data-sentence-id="497e28375a" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5d3337ff4b"> Specifically, she claimed that she needed to be at work in Maryland the next day, which wouldn't have allowed time for sightseeing.</span><span data-sentence-id="171af8f94c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5d3337ff4b"> And, if getting back to work on time was the goal, flying would have been the optimal method of transportation.</span><span data-sentence-id="cd196b5d9c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5d3337ff4b"> Trooper Bollen also noticed that, per the rental agreement, the car was due back in Los Angeles the same day, which left no time for sightseeing and was inconsistent with Sagastizado's statement about returning to Maryland the next day.</span><span data-sentence-id="cf9c5e31be" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="5d3337ff4b"> Moreover, the rental agreement reflected an arrangement Trooper Bollen had become familiar with in his line of work: Drug traffickers generally return rental cars to the original rental location to conceal the destination of the contraband and keep costs down.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d95101e9bd"><span data-sentence-id="0a4cb8f45e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d95101e9bd"> ¶11 At the end of the conversation, Trooper Bollen told Sagastizado that he rarely gave people tickets and that he was not going to write her one.</span><span data-sentence-id="727a312f8b" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d95101e9bd"> But he advised her that he was assigned to the smuggling, trafficking, and interdiction </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">6</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="71dc23ce03"><span data-sentence-id="60581d8095" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="71dc23ce03"> task force, which required him to look for people smuggling large amounts of illegal narcotics or currency across the country.</span><span data-sentence-id="fdb3f29b6f" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="71dc23ce03"> He shared with Sagastizado that he "one hundred percent believed" she was "smuggling" contraband in the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="877ff159a0" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="71dc23ce03"> According to Trooper Bollen, Sagastizado went pale and became nervous when she heard this and told him it wasn't true.</span><span data-sentence-id="c3bc4f3c73" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="71dc23ce03"> He asked her if she had a large amount of cash, guns, cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, or marijuana in the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="ea25373401" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="71dc23ce03"> She responded that she did not.</span><span data-sentence-id="b705a91604" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="71dc23ce03"> He then requested permission to search the car, but Sagastizado refused.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="187d3a1fdd"><span data-sentence-id="9e8fc41c85" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="187d3a1fdd"> ¶12 Trooper Bollen mentioned that his partner in the K-9 unit was just down the road and would be there shortly to perform a dog sniff around the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="0215e280b0" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="187d3a1fdd"> While waiting for the K-9, Trooper Bollen informed Sagastizado that he worked with federal authorities and offered her an opportunity to work with him and his federal partners.</span> She declined.<span data-sentence-id="7fcdcbc42b" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="187d3a1fdd"> When he repeated his question about whether there was anything illegal in the car, she again said no.</span><span data-sentence-id="368d3d5da0" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="187d3a1fdd"> Trooper Bollen told Sagastizado that she could not return to her car yet.</span><span data-sentence-id="ea6ce7a508" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="187d3a1fdd"> As Trooper Bollen walked back to the Tahoe, he had a hunch that Sagastizado had a nefarious motive for her actions: She was involved in the transportation of illegal narcotics.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="fc290a93f1"><span data-sentence-id="c9f202057c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="fc290a93f1"> ¶13 At 7:55 a.m., about thirteen minutes after the initial stop, Trooper Bollen spoke with the three passengers in the Tahoe.</span><span data-sentence-id="931d9fa1a3" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="fc290a93f1"> During this conversation, the defendant mentioned that they had visited his cousin in Los Angeles.</span> He then </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">7</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"><span data-sentence-id="730b7d149b" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"> contradicted Sagastizado by reporting that they had made a stop in Las Vegas (not the Grand Canyon) and that they had opted to travel by car because his brother was scared of flying (not because they wanted to sightsee).</span><span data-sentence-id="f7ca979d3c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"> One of the passengers at some point asked if they were under arrest.</span><span data-sentence-id="1fb752fb91" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"> Trooper Bollen explained that nobody was under arrest and that he was just making sure that their story matched Sagastizado's.</span><span data-sentence-id="e4b8547452" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"> He shared, however, that he suspected they were "smuggling" illegal narcotics, and he asked them if there was anything illegal in the car-be it guns or large amounts of cash, cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, or marijuana.</span><span data-sentence-id="729a09bf45" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"> According to Trooper Bollen, the defendant appeared to stare at the glove box when he heard this question.</span><span data-sentence-id="6ad4fc3898" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"> The passengers responded that there was nothing illegal in the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="58e34efc9e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"> Trooper Bollen requested permission to search the car, but the passengers would not consent to a search.</span><span data-sentence-id="24ba47af59" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"> He concluded his interview by informing them that a K-9 unit was on the way to perform a dog sniff around the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="485c7f8436" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="d14c6744e9"> As he returned to his patrol car, Trooper Bollen had a hunch that the Tahoe's passengers were also involved in drug trafficking.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="3ce5b6577f"><span data-sentence-id="75991491e3" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="3ce5b6577f"> ¶14 Trooper Bollen questioned Sagastizado in his patrol car again at 8:02 a.m. Contrary to what the defendant had just told him, Sagastizado denied visiting the defendant's cousin in Los Angeles.</span><span data-sentence-id="99dac7d814" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="3ce5b6577f"> She later said that the defendant may have seen his cousin while she remained in the hotel room.</span><span data-sentence-id="fff1d0eda1" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="3ce5b6577f"> Sagastizado eventually told Trooper Bollen that she had to get going because she needed to be at work the next </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">8</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="8a81b24abe"> day.<span data-sentence-id="7fdc6e3168" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="8a81b24abe"> After Trooper Bollen discussed how long it would take her to drive to Maryland, Sagastizado asked if she could return to her car.</span><span data-sentence-id="359e681f5b" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="8a81b24abe"> He responded that she could not, but he told her that she was free to step out of the patrol car.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="e01d763366"><span data-sentence-id="8b418b3f15" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="e01d763366"> ¶15 A few minutes later, at 8:05 a.m., CSP Trooper Jeff Verbas arrived with his K-9, Jedi, who is trained to alert to cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine, but not to marijuana or fentanyl.</span><span data-sentence-id="44f48735e0" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="e01d763366"> Trooper Bollen asked the passengers to exit the Tahoe so that Jedi could sniff around the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="1fbfc3c658" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="e01d763366"> One of the passengers asked if the troopers planned to search the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="622ca541d9" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="e01d763366"> Trooper Bollen said that they would only search the car if Jedi alerted to the presence of illegal narcotics.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="657e357d36"><span data-sentence-id="c9167a19ab" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="657e357d36"> ¶16 At 8:09 a.m., Trooper Verbas conducted a dog sniff by directing Jedi around the Tahoe two times.</span><span data-sentence-id="37a34af274" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="657e357d36"> Jedi did not alert to the presence of illegal narcotics.</span><span data-sentence-id="ba914ec9df" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="657e357d36"> But Trooper Bollen remained convinced that there was contraband in the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="9766059f1e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="657e357d36"> Thus, notwithstanding the lack of an alert from Jedi, he relied on his hunches and searched the car with Trooper Verbas's assistance.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="3c6c2689f2"><span data-sentence-id="36d46809f7" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="3c6c2689f2"> ¶17 Troopers Bollen and Verbas searched the Tahoe at 8:12 a.m.</span><span data-sentence-id="48cc3dc72e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="3c6c2689f2"> As they conducted their search, the passengers objected, telling the troopers that the search was illegal because it was being conducted without consent.</span><span data-sentence-id="fa657643c8" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="3c6c2689f2"> Trooper Bollen told them that he believed he had probable cause to search the car, so he didn't need their consent.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">9</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="438be23110"><span data-sentence-id="96a29a16ae" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="438be23110"> ¶18 About five minutes after starting the search, Trooper Bollen asked for the key to the glove compartment.</span><span data-sentence-id="ceb03fd1d2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="438be23110"> One of the passengers asked if he was under arrest and discussed calling his attorney.</span><span data-sentence-id="c8f3a2de31" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="438be23110"> Trooper Bollen replied that if he didn't get a key, he would pry open the glove box.</span><span data-sentence-id="176ba20bc7" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="438be23110"> One of the passengers then provided the key, and Trooper Bollen unlocked the glove box.</span><span data-sentence-id="735580a5cf" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="438be23110"> Inside he found a kilogram of cocaine.</span><span data-sentence-id="e2a8ccd8d0" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="438be23110">^{[<a href="#ftn.FN1" name="FN1" id="FN1">1</a>]} The search also yielded a prescription bottle with Charles Smith's name that contained fentanyl; the prescription on the bottle, however, was not for fentanyl.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="ed095bfcdc"><span data-sentence-id="70f7ba42b9" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ed095bfcdc"> ¶19 The troopers arrested all four of the Tahoe's occupants.</span><span data-sentence-id="830813921e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ed095bfcdc"> The defendant was subsequently charged with drug offenses related to the cocaine and fentanyl recovered.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="0f9bf85b45"><span data-sentence-id="835c2678ad" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0f9bf85b45"> ¶20 The case proceeded, and the defendant filed a pretrial motion to suppress the evidence found during the search.</span><span data-sentence-id="4d9899d56d" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0f9bf85b45"> He argued that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated both because the traffic stop was unreasonably extended and because there was no probable cause for the search.</span><span data-sentence-id="e09ca55776" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0f9bf85b45"> The prosecution opposed the motion.</span><span data-sentence-id="99770a67a1" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0f9bf85b45"> Following an evidentiary hearing, the district court took the matter under advisement.</span><span data-sentence-id="61d09a8881" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0f9bf85b45"> It then issued a well-reasoned order in which it granted the </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">10</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="fe3c7a7700"><span data-sentence-id="e10129e297" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="fe3c7a7700"> defendant's motion.</span><span data-sentence-id="74a20e400f" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="fe3c7a7700"> The court was persuaded by the prosecution that "the traffic stop was not unreasonably prolonged."</span><span data-sentence-id="75dcca1489" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="fe3c7a7700"> But the court ruled for the defendant on the second issue, finding that, while Trooper Bollen "had a hunch that illegal substances were hidden in the vehicle," he lacked probable cause to conduct the search.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="78f980ef64"><span data-sentence-id="e2cf43232c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="78f980ef64"> ¶21 The prosecution timely filed this interlocutory appeal pursuant to section 16-12-102(2), C.R.S. (2021), and C.A.R. 4.1(a).</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="81b3a6e172"> <strong>II. Jurisdiction</strong> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="1c5cc3b672"><span data-sentence-id="f6d2f27857" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1c5cc3b672"> ¶22 Our first task is to determine whether we have jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal.</span><span data-sentence-id="99305c84e5" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1c5cc3b672"> Under section 16-12-102(2) and C.A.R. 4.1(a), the prosecution may file an interlocutory appeal in our court from an order of the district court granting a defendant's pretrial motion to suppress evidence.</span><span data-sentence-id="dd9d77dbed" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1c5cc3b672"> However, the prosecution may only do so if it certifies to the judge who issued the order and to our court </span><span data-sentence-id="9ef7e6400a" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="1c5cc3b672">"that the appeal is not taken for the purposes of delay and the evidence is a substantial part of the proof of the charge pending against the defendant."</span><span data-sentence-id="480c14548c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1c5cc3b672"> § 16-12-102(2); <em>accord</em> C.A.R. 4.1(a).</span><span data-sentence-id="41d392321c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1c5cc3b672"> The defendant does not dispute that the prosecution fulfilled the condition precedent set forth in the statute and the rule.</span><span data-sentence-id="6b9b765499" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1c5cc3b672"> And, based on our review of the record, we conclude that the prosecution indeed did so.</span><span data-sentence-id="065164340c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="1c5cc3b672"> We therefore have jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">11</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="67f09a39fe"> <strong>III. Standard of Review</strong> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="27a9cc3d18"><span data-sentence-id="be3e28e427" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="27a9cc3d18"> ¶23 The next order of business is to set out the standard of review that controls our analysis.</span><span data-sentence-id="79383e4694" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="27a9cc3d18"> Review of a district court's suppression order involves "a mixed question of law and fact."</span><span data-sentence-id="7737a762a0" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="27a9cc3d18"> <em>People v. Moreno</em>, <a href="/vid/902527672" data-vids="902527672">2022 CO 19</a>, ¶ 12, 507 P.3d 1005, 1008 (quoting <em>People v. McIntyre</em>, 2014 CO 39, ¶ 13, <a href="/vid/892975889" data-vids="892975889">325 P.3d 583</a>, 586).</span><span data-sentence-id="2a213c43e7" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="27a9cc3d18"> We defer to the district court's findings of fact and do not disturb them if they're supported by sufficient competent evidence in the record.</span> <em>Id.<span data-sentence-id="ff023620a0" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="27a9cc3d18"></span></em> But we review the district court's conclusions of law-that is, determinations regarding the legal effects of its factual findings-de novo.<span data-sentence-id="da695d1855" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="27a9cc3d18"> <em>Casillas v. People</em>, 2018 CO 78M, ¶ 18, 427 P.3d 804, 809.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="85690ce7ad"> <strong>IV. Analysis</strong> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="be36d6fa0d"><span data-sentence-id="13a6f4f181" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="be36d6fa0d"> ¶24 Having concluded that we have jurisdiction over this appeal, and mindful of the standard of review that steers our analytical ship, we proceed to navigate the district court's ruling.</span><span data-sentence-id="3414c4dbba" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="be36d6fa0d"> We ultimately affirm.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="78086fa9d5"><span data-sentence-id="d6742ea11a" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="78086fa9d5"> ¶25 Probable cause is subject to a reasonableness standard and cannot be established by stacking hunch upon hunch.</span><span data-sentence-id="98366759db" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="78086fa9d5"> Nor is it proper to disregard facts that militate against a finding of probable cause.</span><span data-sentence-id="a004aaa4c3" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="78086fa9d5"> Looking at the facts of this case in their totality-i.e., considering not only those supporting probable cause but also those cutting against it-leads us to conclude that Trooper Bollen lacked probable cause to search the Tahoe.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">12</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="a564fa5ca6"><span data-sentence-id="d7a3fa49ae" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="a564fa5ca6"> <strong>A. Relevant Legal Principles</strong> </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="49b8de7cbb"><span data-sentence-id="53b597574f" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="49b8de7cbb"> ¶26 The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution contains two requirements: (1) all searches and seizures must be reasonable; and (2) a warrant may issue only if </span><span data-sentence-id="541f850f79" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="49b8de7cbb">"probable cause is properly established and the scope of the authorized search is set out with particularity."</span><span data-sentence-id="e3ef90ceed" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="49b8de7cbb">^{[<a href="#ftn.FN2" name="FN2" id="FN2">2</a>]} <em>Kentucky v. King</em>, <a href="/vid/894207754" data-vids="894207754">563 U.S. 452</a>, 459 (2011).</span><span data-sentence-id="9b798c623a" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="49b8de7cbb"> We deal here only with the first requirement.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="b1924701fa"><span data-sentence-id="b0e354e153" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="b1924701fa"> ¶27 A search conducted without a warrant is presumptively unreasonable and thus in contravention of the Fourth Amendment.</span><span data-sentence-id="cfe6f3a6a4" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="b1924701fa"> <em>People v. Allen</em>, 2019 CO 88, ¶ 15, <a href="/vid/894120673" data-vids="894120673">450 P.3d 724</a>, 728.</span> But <span data-sentence-id="6150d3d44e" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="b1924701fa">"the warrant requirement is subject to certain well-delineated exceptions because the touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is reasonableness."</span> <em>Id.<span data-sentence-id="bb81ac0d3e" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="b1924701fa"></span></em> The prosecution shoulders the burden of showing that a warrantless search falls within a recognized exception to the warrant requirement. <em>Id.<span data-sentence-id="4a32bd2b19" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="b1924701fa"></span></em>, 450 P.3d at 728-29.<span data-sentence-id="ae41bbb37c" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="b1924701fa"> One of those exceptions, the automobile exception, </span><span data-sentence-id="f9d731c25a" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="b1924701fa">"authorizes an officer to perform a search of an automobile if he has 'probable cause to believe that the automobile contains evidence of a crime.'"</span> <em>Id.<span data-sentence-id="46755d8804" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="b1924701fa"></span></em> at ¶ 16, 450 P.3d at 729 (quoting <em>People v. Zuniga</em>, <a href="/vid/887946182" data-vids="887946182">2016 CO 52</a>, ¶ 14, <a href="/vid/887946182" data-vids="887946182">372 P.3d 1052</a>, 1056). </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">13</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="bbe1e5da45"><span data-sentence-id="ede64b96bd" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="bbe1e5da45"> ¶28 Although the automobile exception requires probable cause, it does not require exigent circumstances.</span> <em>Id.<span data-sentence-id="aeb95c999b" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="bbe1e5da45"></span></em> at ¶ 32, 450 P.3d at 731. <span data-sentence-id="85ece1e6db" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="bbe1e5da45">"If a car is readily mobile and probable cause exists to believe it contains contraband, the Fourth Amendment . . . permits police to search the vehicle without more."</span><span data-sentence-id="4065178906" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="bbe1e5da45"> <em>Pennsylvania v. Labron</em>, <a href="/vid/889453789" data-vids="889453789">518 U.S. 938</a>, 940 (1996).</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3"> ¶29 <span data-sentence-id="bf2eea4c4b" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3">"A police officer has probable cause to conduct a search when the facts available to him would warrant a person of reasonable caution in the belief that contraband or evidence of a crime is present."</span><span data-sentence-id="340bada7e5" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3"> <em>People v. Bailey</em>, 2018 CO 84, ¶ 20, <a href="/vid/887438032" data-vids="887438032">427 P.3d 821</a>, 827 (quoting <em>Florida v. Harris</em>, <a href="/vid/895266521" data-vids="895266521">568 U.S. 237</a>, 243 (2013)).</span> "<span data-sentence-id="2b800fa7fd" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3">[C]ourts may not engage in a 'divide-and-conquer' analysis of facts"</span><span data-sentence-id="2aaaa4b86b" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3"> to ascertain whether there was probable cause.</span><span data-sentence-id="a36f699abd" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3"> <em>United States v. Valenzuela</em>, <a href="/vid/890637886" data-vids="890637886">365 F.3d 892</a>, 897 (10th Cir.</span> 2004).<span data-sentence-id="3754d0d3b0" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3"> Rather, in analyzing probable cause, we must consider "the totality of the circumstances."</span><span data-sentence-id="bab15d6a69" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3"> <em>Bailey</em>, ¶ 20, 427 P.3d at 827 (quoting <em>Mendez v. People</em>, <a href="/vid/890995384" data-vids="890995384">986 P.2d 275</a>, 280 (Colo. 1999)).</span> "<span data-sentence-id="ab72e0e0d9" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3">[T]he totality of the circumstances test for probable cause is an 'all-things-considered approach' . . . ."</span><span data-sentence-id="fbf18bf393" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="230b2386a3"> <em>Zuniga</em>, ¶ 16, 372 P.3d at 1057 (quoting <em>Harris</em>, <a href="http://vlex.com/search?buscable_id=14&amp;buscable_type=Coleccion&amp;content_type=2&amp;jurisdiction=US&amp;lc_query=texto9_keyword%3A%22568+U.S.+1055%22" data-new-href="/search/jurisdiction:US+content_type:2+lc_query:texto9_keyword%3A" data-vids="">568 U.S. at 1055</a>).</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="f123b90df8"> ¶30 <span data-sentence-id="79ed7a2799" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="f123b90df8">"The probable cause standard does not lend itself to mathematical certainties and should not be laden with hypertechnical interpretations or rigid legal rules."</span><span data-sentence-id="d4e990aec7" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="f123b90df8"> <em>Bailey</em>, ¶ 21, 427 P.3d at 827 (quoting <em>People v. Altman</em>, <a href="/vid/889008470" data-vids="889008470">960 P.2d 1164</a>, 1167 (Colo. 1998)).</span><span data-sentence-id="d722401c08" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="f123b90df8"> Instead, it calls for "a practical, common-sense decision </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">14</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="2b174e0ef3"><span data-sentence-id="a7f0b65625" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2b174e0ef3"> whether a fair probability exists that a search of a particular place will reveal contraband or evidence of a crime.</span>" <em>Id.<span data-sentence-id="aae1d37c28" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="2b174e0ef3"></span></em> (quoting <em>Altman</em>, 960 P.2d at 1167).<span data-sentence-id="3abcf0d466" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="2b174e0ef3"> As we have observed, probable cause is "</span><span data-sentence-id="d02bcd0654" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2b174e0ef3">based on factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent people, not legal technicians, act."</span> <em>Id.<span data-sentence-id="ad3062afc3" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2b174e0ef3"></span></em> (quoting <em>Mendez</em>, 986 P.2d at 280). </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="88c6b6725b"><span data-sentence-id="b49177d984" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="88c6b6725b"> ¶31 A fact's worth is not wholly eliminated by "a possible innocent explanation."</span><span data-sentence-id="796f2f21bc" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="88c6b6725b"> <em>Zuniga</em>, ¶ 23, 372 P.3d at 1059.</span><span data-sentence-id="a907b0a4fe" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="88c6b6725b"> Colorado's courts and law enforcement agencies "frequently consider non-criminal and legally ambiguous conduct in probable cause analyses, and the possibility of an innocent justification merely affects a fact's weight and persuasiveness, not its inclusion in the analysis."</span> <em>Id.<span data-sentence-id="b7a13f34d3" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="88c6b6725b"></span></em> at ¶ 21, 372 P.3d at 1058.<span data-sentence-id="325ba5620b" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="88c6b6725b"> Even lawful circumstances, when considered together, may "lead to a legitimate inference of criminal activity."</span><span data-sentence-id="a98ff3d82f" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="88c6b6725b"> <em>Bailey</em>, ¶ 22, 427 P.3d at 827 (quoting <em>Altman</em>, 960 P.2d at 1171).</span><span data-sentence-id="80f251caec" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="88c6b6725b"> Indeed, while certain facts, considered alone, may not amount to probable cause, "those same facts may support a finding of probable cause when considered in combination."</span> <em>Id.<span data-sentence-id="fc8d932809" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="88c6b6725b"></span></em> (quoting <em>Grassi v. People</em>, <a href="/vid/889431568" data-vids="889431568">2014 CO 12</a>, ¶ 23, 320 P.3d 332, 338). </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="f90f422ccd"><span data-sentence-id="f6ae66e9be" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="f90f422ccd"> ¶32 But just as facts that are consistent with innocent behavior or have an innocent connotation may not be disregarded, neither may probable cause be established by ignoring facts that cut against it.</span><span data-sentence-id="326722dca2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="f90f422ccd"> <em>Valenzuela</em>, 365 F.3d at 897.</span> Courts </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">15</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="24ed5690fb"> must <span data-sentence-id="2ca950f036" quote="true" data-paragraph-id="24ed5690fb">"look not only to the facts supporting probable cause, but also to those that militate against it."</span> <em>Id.</em> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="2fd59a4aa3"><span data-sentence-id="b362e7f750" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2fd59a4aa3"> ¶33 An officer's hunch is insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion to believe criminal activity may be afoot, <em>United States v. Arvizu</em>, <a href="/vid/887643287" data-vids="887643287">534 U.S. 266</a>, 273-74 (2002), and reasonable suspicion is a less demanding standard than probable cause, <em>Illinois v. Wardlow</em>, <a href="/vid/890418860" data-vids="890418860">528 U.S. 119</a>, 123 (2000).</span><span data-sentence-id="7d9552ac55" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2fd59a4aa3"> Because probable cause is measured against an objective standard of reasonableness, it cannot be established "simply by piling hunch upon hunch."</span><span data-sentence-id="326722dca2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2fd59a4aa3"> <em>Valenzuela</em>, 365 F.3d at 897.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="1a2229d703"> <strong>B. Application</strong> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="ad2b3a7e2b"><span data-sentence-id="7a45c5f2db" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ad2b3a7e2b"> ¶34 On the date in question, Trooper Bollen had extensive training and experience in drug interdiction.</span><span data-sentence-id="c982d2e551" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ad2b3a7e2b"> That training and experience, combined with the circumstances present, led Trooper Bollen to have several hunches.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="2936ba1c3e"><span data-sentence-id="b698729152" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2936ba1c3e"> ¶35 Trooper Bollen had a hunch that the Tahoe might be transporting illegal narcotics.</span><span data-sentence-id="641e8b42f9" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2936ba1c3e"> The car was a rental, had license plates from another state, and was traveling from west to east on I-70.</span><span data-sentence-id="c9b67f9702" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="2936ba1c3e"> Those details fit the pattern of drug trafficking he had previously observed on I-70.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="239ecdbb7f"><span data-sentence-id="310f580d15" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="239ecdbb7f"> ¶36 Once he spoke with Sagastizado in his patrol car, he had a hunch that she was involved in the transportation of illegal narcotics.</span><span data-sentence-id="8956ac8622" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="239ecdbb7f"> First, she had rented the Tahoe in Los Angeles, which he knew was a well-known source of illegal narcotics.</span><span data-sentence-id="765682eecb" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="239ecdbb7f"> Second, her story about the trip wasn't believable.</span><span data-sentence-id="109ce06f38" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="239ecdbb7f"> Her statements about visiting </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">16</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="64d8ed1db9"><span data-sentence-id="e97abd0d33" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="64d8ed1db9"> the Grand Canyon on the way from Los Angeles, her plans to do more sightseeing, and her supposed need to return to work in Maryland the next day didn't match reality.</span><span data-sentence-id="10e7be9860" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="64d8ed1db9"> Third, at some point, she tried to change the conversation, which Trooper Bollen took as an attempt to avoid answering more questions about the trip.</span><span data-sentence-id="29f57eb94d" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="64d8ed1db9"> And fourth, she became nervous when accused of trafficking drugs.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="731dd3d6ec"><span data-sentence-id="f2d06b7c2a" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="731dd3d6ec"> ¶37 After speaking with Sagastizado, Trooper Bollen contacted her cohorts, and his conversation with them gave rise to yet another hunch-they, too, were involved in the transportation of illegal narcotics.</span><span data-sentence-id="50eb00a683" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="731dd3d6ec"> First, the information they disclosed was inconsistent with that provided by Sagastizado.</span><span data-sentence-id="8822b591d2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="731dd3d6ec"> And second, the defendant stared at the glove box when Trooper Bollen asked if there was any contraband in the car.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="21f53b3cae"><span data-sentence-id="73e74c6a84" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="21f53b3cae"> ¶38 Trooper Bollen's hunches were certainly justified by the circumstances.</span><span data-sentence-id="7d73070272" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="21f53b3cae"> But a hunch cannot be equated with probable cause.</span><span data-sentence-id="7b404586b2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="21f53b3cae"> And in determining that he had probable cause, Trooper Bollen mistakenly piled hunch upon hunch while ignoring Jedi's failure to detect contraband in the car.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="26876e48bd"><span data-sentence-id="d796175dc4" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="26876e48bd"> ¶39 The prosecution nevertheless argues that "nine factors" gave Trooper Bollen probable cause to search.</span><span data-sentence-id="cf42938c32" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="26876e48bd"> When those factors are stripped to their core, they can be grouped into the four relevant circumstances underlying Trooper Bollen's hunches: (1) the Tahoe was a rental, had out-of-state license plates, and was traveling eastbound on I-70; (2) Sagastizado had rented the Tahoe in Los Angeles; </span></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">17</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="8c2605cdcf"><span data-sentence-id="f7c1eb9f19" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="8c2605cdcf"> (3) Sagastizado wasn't forthright about the trip and became nervous when Trooper Bollen shared his suspicion about drug trafficking; and (4) the passengers were not forthright about the trip either and the defendant stared at the glove box when Trooper Bollen asked if there was contraband in the car.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="96aede2fab"><span data-sentence-id="343fb5f9e5" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="96aede2fab"> ¶40 Like the district court, however, we must consider the <em>totality of the</em> <em>circumstances</em>.</span><span data-sentence-id="27fca1c695" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="96aede2fab"> That requires us to add a fifth circumstance to the mix: Jedi did not alert to the presence of illegal narcotics during the sniff around the car.</span><span data-sentence-id="4877f5da95" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="96aede2fab"> Trooper Bollen omitted this circumstance from his probable cause consideration, and the prosecution commits the same error in its totality-of-the-circumstances analysis.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="3a2774d636"><span data-sentence-id="6794e5fc14" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="3a2774d636"> ¶41 The probable cause standard doesn't consider only those facts that are favorable to law enforcement (i.e., the ones that triggered Trooper Bollen's hunches).</span><span data-sentence-id="6565c74858" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="3a2774d636"> It considers instead the totality of the circumstances.</span><span data-sentence-id="ce265939e2" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="3a2774d636"> As such, we must look not only to the facts supporting probable cause, but also to those militating against it.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="0077a49eb5"><span data-sentence-id="31af74d486" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0077a49eb5"> ¶42 We conclude that the facts, considered together, did not establish a fair probability that a search of the Tahoe would reveal contraband or evidence of a crime.</span><span data-sentence-id="8852d346e7" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="0077a49eb5"> Therefore, while Trooper Bollen had hunch, upon hunch, upon hunch that illegal substances were concealed in the Tahoe, he lacked probable cause to conduct the challenged search.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">18</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<p data-paragraph-id="79b98eeb5a"> <strong>V. Conclusion</strong> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="ddd3fc0240"><span data-sentence-id="698baf530f" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ddd3fc0240"> ¶43 Because the district court correctly resolved the defendant's motion to suppress, we affirm and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p><div class="pagebreak"><span class="number">19</span></div><p data-paragraph-id="d41d8cd98f"></p>
<small></small><p data-paragraph-id="796feb9692"> --------- </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="ff6cb15c8b"> Notes: </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="963e9c2483"><span data-sentence-id="5c629d8452" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="963e9c2483"> ^{[<a href="#FN1" name="ftn.FN1" id="ftn.FN1">1</a>]} The cocaine's packaging apparently contained mineral oil, which, according to Trooper Verbas, acted as a masking agent and threw off Jedi's scent.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="ee306a7e1c"><span data-sentence-id="bca00917bc" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ee306a7e1c"> ^{[<a href="#FN2" name="ftn.FN2" id="ftn.FN2">2</a>]} Our state's Fourth Amendment counterpart also prohibits (1) unreasonable searches and seizures and (2) search warrants that either fail to establish probable cause or lack particularity.</span> Colo. Const. art. 2, § 7.<span data-sentence-id="6ce7d84663" quote="false" data-paragraph-id="ee306a7e1c"> Because the ruling under challenge relied exclusively on Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, we limit our analysis accordingly.</span> </p>
<p data-paragraph-id="796feb9692"> --------- </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>