The People of the State of Colorado v. Troy J. Baker

── The People of the State of Colorado v. Troy J. Baker ── Court: Supreme Court of Colorado Date: June 01, 2026 Category: General 1 2026 CO 41 The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Troy J. Baker, Defendant-Appellee No. 25SA344 Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc June 1, 2026          In this C.A.R. 4.1 interlocutory appeal, the supreme court reverses the district court's order suppressing evidence from a protective sweep and search of the vehicle in which the defendant was a passenger. The court concludes that the officers acted within the bounds of both the United States and Colorado Constitutions: the protective sweep was justified by officer-safety concerns, and the vehicle search fell within the automobile exception. The case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings. 2           Interlocutory Appeal from the District Court District Court, City and County of Denver, Case No. 25CR831 Honorable Karen L. Brody, Judge           Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellant: John Walsh, District Attorney, Second Judicial District Jeff M. Van der Veer, Senior Deputy District Attorney Denver, Colorado           Attorneys for Defendant-Appellee: Megan A. Ring, Public Defender Julia Jones, Deputy Public Defender Denver, Colorado 3           JUSTICE BLANCO delivered the Opinion of the Court, in which CHIEF JUSTICE MARQUEZ, JUSTICE BOATRIGHT, JUSTICE HOOD, JUSTICE GABRIEL, JUSTICE SAMOUR, and JUSTICE BERKENKOTTER joined. 4           OPINION           BLANCO JUSTICE          ¶1 Troy J. Baker was charged with one count of possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and methamphetamine and two counts of possession of a weapon by a previous offender ("POWPO"). Before trial, Baker moved to suppress evidence that he alleged the police had obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and article II, section 7 of the Colorado Constitution. The district court agreed and suppressed the evidence in question. Because we conclude that the search was within the limits of both the U.S. and Colorado Constitutions, we reverse the district court's order.[1]          I. Facts and Procedural History          ¶2 At 10:03 p.m. on a Sunday night, two police officers pulled over a black Toyota ("the Toyota") after noticing it did not have a front license plate. Before leaving their patrol car, the officers saw the Toyota's driver, Rachelle Herrera, and its front seat passenger, Baker, moving their arms back and forth with their elbows above their shoulders. This was a high-crime area, and the officers were already 5 looking for drug and gun activity when they witnessed what they believed to be these "furtive movements." The officers called for additional officer coverage.          ¶3 At 10:04 p.m., the officers approached the Toyota and obtained the names of the occupants. One minute later, at 10:05 p.m., one officer stayed with the Toyota while the other officer returned to the patrol car to run both occupants' names through a database. Through the search, the officer discovered that Baker had recently been arrested for POWPO. By 10:07 p.m., when the officer exited the patrol car, the additional officer coverage had arrived.          ¶4 The officers then removed Baker from the Toyota at 10:08 p.m. An officer patted him down and asked if he had a gun, to which Baker responded that he did not. Less than one minute after Baker was removed, officers searched the passenger compartment where Baker had been seated, and by 10:10 p.m., they found a handgun under the front passenger seat that Baker had occupied.          ¶5 After finding the handgun, police officers searched the rest of the Toyota. Within three minutes, at 10:13 p.m., the officers found a black bag in the backseat containing a large amount of fentanyl pills and methamphetamine. The officers also found a red purse on the driver's side floorboard containing more fentanyl pills.          ¶6 It is worth noti