A search warrant is a court order allowing law enforcement:
- to search a specific location and
- to seize any evidence of a crime.
Under Colorado and federal law, the police generally cannot search your home, car, or other private property without a valid search warrant. (There are some exceptions, as we will discuss below).
In our experience defending Colorado criminal cases, some of the most important legal issues arise from how police obtained evidence—not simply what they found. We carefully examine whether officers had probable cause, whether the warrant was properly issued and executed, and whether the search stayed within constitutional limits.
A search that violates your rights can sometimes result in key evidence being excluded. This may leave the D.A. with too weak of a case to continue prosecuting you.
Search warrants should not be confused with other types of Colorado warrants:
| Warrant | Purpose | Issued By | Based On |
| Search Warrant | To search a specific location for specific evidence of a crime. | Judge or Magistrate | Probable cause to believe evidence is present |
| Bench Warrant | To arrest someone who failed to appear in court or comply with court orders. | Judge | Failure to appear in court or follow court orders |
| Arrest Warrant | To arrest a person suspected of committing a crime. | Judge or Magistrate | Probable cause to believe someone committed a crime |
In this article, our Colorado criminal defense lawyers will address the following key topics:
- 1. Search Warrants
- 2. How Police Get Search Warrants
- 3. Warrantless Searches
- 4. No-Knock Warrants
- 5. Unlawful Searches
- 6. Pat-Down Searches
- 7. Leaving During a Search
- Frequently Asked Questions
1. Search Warrants
A search warrant is an order issued by a judge or magistrate that allows police, sheriff’s officers, or other law enforcement to search for a particular location. This may include your
- home,
- vehicle,
- business offices, or
- other locations where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The search warrant allows law enforcement to search for evidence of criminal activity and confiscate the evidence they find. Under the U.S. Constitution, searches and seizures inside the home without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable.1
2. How Police Get Search Warrants
Law enforcement officers must get a valid search warrant before they can search your property without your consent. This means going to a judge for an order to authorize the search.
The police must convince the judge that they have “probable cause” to believe there is evidence of criminal activity at the location to be searched. The officers requesting the warrant are called the affiants, and they spell out the probable cause in an affidavit. The police may present the judge supporting evidence, such as:
- sworn statements,
- witness statements, and/or
- statements from police informants.
Search warrants generally have to specify
- the location they are searching, and
- the specific type of evidence they are looking for.
Law enforcement searches are limited to the areas specified in the warrant. Searching other, unrelated areas may constitute an unlawful search (unless there is an exceptional circumstance, discussed below). Once police finish searching, they should leave a copy of the report along with a list of seized items with a responsible occupant. If no one is there, the documents should be left in a conspicuous location.
Search warrants should be executed promptly and no later than 14 days after being issued.2
We know that judges rely heavily on the information officers include in the affidavit supporting a warrant application. If that affidavit leaves out important facts, relies on stale information, or contains misleading statements, the warrant itself may be vulnerable to challenge. We routinely scrutinize warrant affidavits because probable cause is often much weaker than it first appears.
You might assume that if police have a search warrant, the search must have been legal. That is simply not true. We regularly review warrant applications, affidavits, and body-camera footage to determine whether officers actually had probable cause, searched only the places authorized by the warrant, and complied with Colorado’s execution requirements. Some of the strongest Fourth Amendment defenses arise not from what police found, but from how they obtained it.
3. Warrantless Searches
The police can only search your property if the search falls within one of the exceptions to unreasonable search and seizure. Some of these exceptions are discussed below.
Consent
The simplest way for the police to search your property without a warrant is with consent. If the police ask whether they can search the property and the owner or resident allows them inside, they may not need a warrant.
If you let the police search your property, they may be able to use any evidence of criminal activity against you. For courts to recognize your consent as valid, it must be given freely and voluntarily. In Colorado, police are required to inform you that you can refuse consent.3
Search Incident to a Lawful Arrest
When police arrest you based on probable cause that you are involved in criminal activity, they may search the immediate area as part of a search incident to a lawful arrest. However, these searches are limited to the area within your immediate control.
If the police have an arrest warrant for a person in your home, they may be able to come in and arrest the person. However, if you do not consent to a search of the house, they may only be able to search the area immediately around the person being arrested.4
Hot Pursuit
The exception of hot pursuit only allows for warrantless searches in certain emergency situations. If the police are in pursuit of a fleeing suspect, they may be able to enter public property without a warrant.5
Exigent Circumstances
Similarly, suppose the police had a reasonable cause to believe that entry of property was necessary to prevent physical harm to another person or destruction of evidence. In that case, their warrantless entry may meet one of the exceptions to the rule.6
Plain View
The police may not need a warrant to seize evidence of criminal activity in plain view. For example, if the police pull you over for a traffic violation and see drug contraband in your back seat, they may:
- arrest you for possession of drugs or drug contraband, and
- search the vehicle for other evidence of drug crimes.7
4. No-Knock Warrants
A no-knock search warrant allows police to enter a property without identifying themselves first. This is different from “knock and announce” warrants, where police must:
- knock first and announce themselves,
- demand to be let in, and
- wait a reasonable time to be let in before forcibly entering.
For judges to issue a no-knock warrant, the police must show probable cause that there is a credible threat to someone’s life, including the officers.
- the suspect’s criminal history,
- the suspect’s gun sales records,
- relevant statements by witnesses or informants, and
- intelligence files.8
In our experience, no-knock warrants receive some of the closest scrutiny in criminal cases because they authorize one of the most intrusive actions law enforcement can take. We carefully examine whether officers actually presented specific, reliable evidence of a credible threat to human life or instead relied on generalized safety concerns or a person’s criminal history.
When the facts do not justify a no-knock entry, we use that issue to challenge the legality of the search and the evidence it produced.
5. Unlawful Searches
If you are arrested based on evidence found as the result of an illegal search, your attorney may be able to prevent that evidence from being used against you in court. This is generally done through a motion to suppress evidence.
Under the Exclusionary Rule, evidence gathered through an unreasonable search may be excluded from use at trial. Even if the evidence shows you were involved in an unlawful or criminal activity, suppression of the evidence means it cannot be shown to the jury at trial. If the evidence is all the prosecutor has, suppressing the evidence may mean they have no case against you, and your charges may be dropped.9
Under the “fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine,” If an unlawful search turns up evidence of illegal activity – and the police use that evidence to obtain a search warrant – evidence of the latter search may also be excluded. The United States Supreme Court reasoned that the first illegal search tainted the evidence obtained in the later search, even if police later used a warrant.10
In our experience, motions to suppress often determine the outcome of a criminal case. We have seen serious felony charges dismissed after a court ruled that officers violated the Fourth Amendment and Article II, Section 7 of Colorado’s constitution when obtaining or executing a search warrant. Even when the evidence appears stacked against you, constitutional violations put the D.A. on the defensive.
6. Pat-Down Searches
If police reasonably suspect you are armed and dangerous – or if you consent – they can perform a pat-down search on you for weapons without getting a warrant. This is called a Terry frisk.In order to determine whether you may be armed and dangerous, police consider:
- what crime they reasonably suspect you of,
- whether you are known to be carrying weapons,
- your behavior,
- what time of day it is,
- how many other officers are present,
- who else is present, and
- any other relevant factors.
From what we have seen, officers sometimes expand a lawful pat-down into a much broader search than the Constitution allows. A Terry frisk is supposed to be limited to determining whether someone is carrying a weapon—not searching for drugs or other evidence of a crime. We closely review body-camera footage and police reports to determine whether officers stayed within those constitutional limits, because evidence discovered during an unlawful frisk may be subject to suppression.
7. Leaving During a Search
You should be allowed to leave the property when police are searching it. However, police may insist you stay if:- you are named in the warrant as possibly having evidence on your person, or
- the police “detain you” because they have reasonable suspicion that you committed a crime, or
- the police reasonably believe your leaving would result in the destruction of evidence or that you will alert other suspects to flee.12
We have had clients mistakenly believe they were under arrest simply because officers told them they could not leave during a search. In reality, the legal authority to temporarily detain someone during the execution of a search warrant is limited and depends on the specific circumstances.
We examine why officers detained our clients, how long the detention lasted, and whether it exceeded what the Constitution permits. Unlawful detentions can sometimes lead to the suppression of statements or other evidence obtained during the search.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is required for a Colorado judge to issue a search warrant?
A Colorado judge may issue a search warrant only after reviewing a sworn affidavit establishing probable cause. The affidavit must identify the place, person, or property to be searched, describe the evidence officers are seeking, explain why there is probable cause to believe a crime has occurred, and show why the evidence is likely to be found at the location to be searched. A warrant that is not supported by probable cause or fails to particularly describe the place to be searched or the items to be seized may violate the Fourth Amendment and Article II, Section 7 of the Colorado Constitution.
In our experience, some of the strongest defenses begin long before officers execute the warrant. We routinely discover affidavits that rely on stale information, omit important facts, or make assumptions that fall short of probable cause. Even when police recover incriminating evidence, an unconstitutional warrant can lead to that evidence being excluded from trial.
When can police execute a search warrant in Colorado?
Colorado law generally requires officers executing a search warrant at a dwelling to do so between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. unless a judge specifically authorizes execution at another time. Officers generally must identify themselves as law enforcement, activate their body-worn cameras, knock and announce their presence, and allow occupants a reasonable amount of time to answer before entering unless a lawful exception applies.
These requirements were strengthened by Senate Bill 23-254. In our experience, the way officers execute a warrant is just as important as the warrant itself. We carefully review body-camera footage, dispatch logs, and witness statements to determine whether police complied with Colorado’s execution requirements. Small deviations from the law sometimes become significant constitutional issues.
Can Colorado police still use no-knock search warrants?
Yes, but only in limited circumstances. Colorado law now places significant restrictions on no-knock search warrants. A judge may authorize one only when the statutory requirements are met, such as when officers have probable cause for an arrest or there is a credible threat to human life that justifies entering without first announcing their presence. The mere possibility that evidence could be destroyed is no longer enough by itself to justify a no-knock warrant.
Prosecutors often argue that officers faced extraordinary dangers justifying a no-knock entry. We examine those claims carefully because they must be supported by actual evidence—not speculation or generalized concerns. Courts take these constitutional protections seriously, and so do we.
Do police have to knock before entering with a search warrant?
Usually yes. Colorado law generally requires officers executing a search warrant to knock, announce their identity and purpose loudly enough for occupants to hear, and wait a reasonable amount of time before entering. Officers may bypass these requirements only if a judge authorizes a valid no-knock warrant or an objectively reasonable emergency exists, such as an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury that was not created by law enforcement itself.
Disputes over how long officers waited before forcing entry are common in the cases we see. Body-camera footage often tells a different story from police reports. We carefully compare the officers’ written accounts with the available video and other evidence to determine whether your constitutional rights were respected.
Can evidence be thrown out if a Colorado search warrant was illegal?
Yes. If officers violated the Fourth Amendment, Article II, Section 7 of the Colorado Constitution, or Colorado’s warrant statutes when obtaining or executing a search warrant, a judge may suppress the evidence gathered during the search. Without that evidence, prosecutors may have difficulty proving the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
We always tell our clients that suppression motions frequently determine the outcome of criminal cases. We have seen cases dismissed or substantially weakened after exposing constitutional violations that were not apparent from the arrest alone. Every warrant deserves a careful legal review.
Can police search areas or seize property that is not listed in the warrant?
Generally no. A search warrant limits both where officers may search and what they may seize. Police may search only places where the items described in the warrant could reasonably be found, although exceptions—such as evidence discovered in plain view while officers are lawfully present—may apply. If officers exceed the scope of the warrant, the search may violate constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
We have had many cases where officers searched rooms, containers, electronic devices, or personal property that fell outside the warrant’s authorized scope. When this happens, we compare every line of the warrant against what officers actually searched to determine whether they exceeded their legal authority.
Can a search warrant be issued electronically in Colorado?
Yes. Colorado law allows judges to receive warrant applications and supporting affidavits electronically and to issue search warrants using electronic signatures. An electronically issued warrant has the same legal effect as a traditional paper warrant, but it must still satisfy all constitutional and statutory requirements, including probable cause and particularity.
Based on our experience, the fact that a warrant was signed electronically rarely determines whether it is lawful. Instead, we focus on whether the affidavit contained truthful, complete, and sufficient facts to justify the search. An electronic warrant is subject to the same constitutional scrutiny as any other warrant.
How long is a search warrant valid in Colorado?
Under Colorado law, a search warrant generally must be executed within 14 days after it is issued. If officers fail to execute the warrant within that time, it expires and ordinarily cannot be used unless a judge issues a new warrant supported by probable cause.
We cannot emphasize enough that deadlines matter. We carefully review the warrant, return, and execution records to confirm that officers complied with every statutory requirement. An expired or improperly executed warrant can become an important issue in a motion to suppress evidence.
Does a search warrant mean I will be charged with a crime?
No. A search warrant authorizes police to search for evidence—it does not mean you are guilty or that criminal charges will necessarily be filed. After the search, prosecutors decide whether the evidence supports filing charges, requesting additional investigation, or closing the case without prosecution.
Many of our clients assume that a search warrant guarantees an arrest or conviction, but that is not the case. We often become involved immediately after a search to protect our clients’ rights, communicate with investigators when appropriate, and identify legal issues before formal charges are ever filed. Early representation can sometimes change the course of a case before it reaches court.
Can police search my phone with a search warrant?
Generally yes, if the warrant specifically authorizes the search of the phone and establishes probable cause to believe it contains evidence of a crime. Because smartphones contain vast amounts of personal information, courts require warrants to describe with reasonable particularity the device to be searched and the evidence officers are seeking. A warrant authorizing a search of a phone does not necessarily allow police to search every file or application without limitation.
Electronic search warrants raise unique Fourth Amendment issues because they can authorize the seizure of years of private information. We carefully review whether the warrant properly limited the scope of the digital search and whether investigators stayed within those limits when examining a client’s devices.
What did SB23-254 do?
In 2023, Colorado enacted Senate Bill 23-254, which significantly changed how police execute search warrants at homes. The law was designed to reduce unnecessary risks during residential searches while strengthening constitutional protections for occupants.
Among other changes, officers executing a search warrant at a dwelling generally must:
- Execute the warrant between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., unless a judge specifically authorizes another time for good cause;
- Be readily identifiable as law enforcement by wearing a uniform or visible badge;
- Wear and activate body-worn cameras while entering the premises;
- Knock and announce their identity and purpose loudly enough for occupants to hear;
- Wait a reasonable amount of time before entering based on the size of the dwelling; and
- Delay entry if officers reasonably believe someone is coming to the door to let them inside voluntarily.
The legislation also substantially narrowed the circumstances in which a judge may authorize a no-knock search warrant. Today, a no-knock warrant generally may be issued only if there is probable cause to arrest a suspect or officers demonstrate that entering without announcing is necessary because of a credible threat to human life. The possibility that evidence might be destroyed, standing alone, is no longer enough to justify a no-knock entry.
From our perspective as Colorado criminal defense attorneys, SB 23-254 has given courts clearer standards for evaluating whether officers followed the law when executing a search warrant. In many of our cases, the dispute is not whether police had a warrant—it is whether they executed it lawfully.
We routinely review body-camera footage, dispatch records, warrant returns, and witness statements to determine whether officers complied with the knock-and-announce requirements, properly identified themselves, executed the warrant during authorized hours, and honored the constitutional limits on no-knock entries. When they do not, those violations can become powerful grounds for asking the court to suppress the evidence obtained during the search.
Legal References
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (1980). See also People v. McKay, (Colo. 2021) 513 P.3d 347. C.R.S. 16-3-301 — C.R.S. 16-3-311.
- C.R.S. 16-3-301 — C.R.S. 16-3-311. Colo. R. Crim. P. 41, which reads as follows:
(a) Authority to Issue Warrant. A search warrant authorized by this Rule may be issued by any judge of a court of record. (b) Grounds for Issuance. A search warrant may be issued under this Rule to search for and seize any property: (1) Which is stolen or embezzled; or (2) Which is designed or intended for use as a means of committing a criminal offense; or (3) Which is or has been used as a means of committing a criminal offense; or (4) The possession of which is illegal; or (5) Which would be material evidence in a subsequent criminal prosecution in this state or in another state; or (6) The seizure of which is expressly required, authorized, or permitted by any statute of this state; or (7) Which is kept, stored, maintained, transported, sold, dispensed, or possessed in violation of a statute of this state, under circumstances involving a serious threat to public safety or order, or to public health. (c) Application for Search Warrant. (1) A search warrant shall issue only on affidavit sworn or affirmed to before the judge, except as provided in (c)(3). Such affidavit shall relate facts sufficient to: (I) Identify or describe, as nearly as may be, the premises, person, place, or thing to be searched; (II) Identify or describe, as nearly as may be, the property to be searched for, seized, or inspected; (III) Establish the grounds for issuance of the warrant, or probable cause to believe that such grounds exist; and (IV) Establish probable cause to believe that the property to be searched for, seized, or inspected is located at, in, or upon the premises, person, place, or thing to be searched. (2) The affidavit required by this section may include sworn testimony reduced to writing and signed under oath by the witness giving the testimony before issuance of the warrant. A copy of the affidavit and a copy of the transcript of testimony taken in support of the request for a search warrant shall be attached to the search warrant filed with the court. (2.5) A no-knock search warrant, which means, for purposes of this section, a search warrant authorized by the court to be executed by law enforcement officers through a forcible entry without first announcing their identity, purpose, and authority, shall be issued only if the affidavit for such warrant: (I) Complies with the provisions of subsections (1) and (2) of this section (c) and section 16-3-303(4), C.R.S.; (II) Specifically requests the issuance of a no-knock search warrant; (III) Relates sufficient circumstances to support the issuance of a no-knock search warrant; (IV) Has been reviewed and approved for legal sufficiency and signed by a district attorney with the date and his or her attorney registration number on the affidavit, pursuant to section 20-1-106.1(2), C.R.S.; and (V) If the grounds for the issuance of a no-knock warrant are established by a confidential informant, the affidavit for such warrant shall contain a statement by the affiant concerning when such grounds became known or were verified by the affiant, but such statement shall not identify the confidential informant. (3) Application and Issuance of a Warrant by Facsimile or Electronic Transmission. A warrant, signed affidavit, and accompanying documents may be transmitted by electronic facsimile transmission (fax) or by electronic transfer with electronic signatures to the judge, who may act upon the transmitted documents as if they were originals. A warrant affidavit may be sworn to or affirmed by administration of the oath over the telephone by the judge. The affidavit with electronic signature received by the judge or magistrate and the warrant approved by the judge or magistrate, signed with electronic signature, shall be deemed originals. The judge or magistrate shall facilitate the filing of the original affidavit and original warrant with the clerk of the court and shall take reasonable steps to prevent the tampering with the affidavit and warrant. The issuing judge or magistrate shall also forward a copy of the warrant and affidavit, with electronic signatures, to the affiant. This subsection (c)(3) does not authorize the court to issue warrants without having in its possession either a faxed copy of the signed affidavit and warrant or an electronic copy of the affidavit and warrant with electronic signatures. (d) Issuance, Contents, Execution, and Return of Warrant. (1) If the judge is satisfied that grounds for the application exist, or that there is probable cause to believe that such grounds exist, he shall issue a search warrant, which shall: (I) Identify or describe, as nearly as may be, the premises, person, place, or thing to be searched; (II) Identify or describe, as nearly as may be, the property to be searched for, seized, or inspected; (III) State the grounds or probable cause for its issuance; and (IV) State the names of the persons whose affidavits of testimony have been taken in support thereof. (2) The search warrant may also contain such other and further orders as the judge may deem necessary to comply with the provisions of a statute, charter, or ordinance, or to provide for the custody or delivery to the proper officer of any property seized under the warrant, or otherwise to accomplish the purposes of the warrant. (3) Unless the court otherwise directs, every search warrant authorizes the officer executing the same: (I) To execute and serve the warrant at any time; and (II) To use and employ such force as may reasonably be necessary in the performance of the duties commanded by the warrant. (4) Joinder. The search of one or more persons, premises, places, or things, may be commanded in a single warrant or in separate warrants, if compliance is made with Rule 41(c)(1)(IV) of these Rules. (5) Execution and Return. (I) Except as otherwise provided in this Rule, a search warrant shall be directed to any officer authorized by law to execute it in the county wherein the property is located. (II) Any judge issuing a search warrant, for the search of a person or for the search of any motor vehicle, aircraft, or other object which is mobile or capable of being transported may make an order authorizing a peace officer to be named in such warrant to execute the same, and the person named in such order may execute such warrant anywhere in the state. All sheriffs, coroners, police officers, and officers of the Colorado State Patrol, when required, in their respective counties, shall aid and assist in the execution of such warrant. The order authorized by this subsection (5) may also authorize execution of the warrant by any officer authorized by law to execute it in the county wherein the property is located. (III) When any officer, having a warrant for the search of a person or for the search of any motor vehicle, aircraft, or other object which is mobile or capable of being transported, shall be in pursuit thereof and such person, motor vehicle, aircraft, or other object shall cross or enter into another county, such officer is authorized to execute the warrant in such other county. (IV) It shall be the duty of all peace officers into whose hands any search warrant shall come, to execute the same, in their respective counties or municipalities, and make due return thereof. (V) The officers executing a search warrant shall first announce their identity, purpose, and authority, and if they are not admitted, may make a forcible entry into the place to be searched; however, the officers may make forcible entry without such prior announcement if the warrant expressly authorizes them to do so or if the particular facts and circumstances known to them at the time the warrant is to be executed adequately justify dispensing with this requirement. (VI) A search warrant shall be executed within 14 days after its date. The officer taking property under the warrant shall give to the person from whom or from whose premises the property was taken a copy of the warrant and a receipt for the property or shall leave the copy and receipt at the place from which the property was taken. The return shall be made promptly and shall be accompanied by a written inventory of any property taken. The inventory shall be made in the presence of the applicant for the warrant and the person from whose possession or premises the property was taken, if they are present, or in the presence of at least one credible person other than the applicant for the warrant or the person from whose possession or premises the property was taken, and shall be verified by the officer. In a case involving the seizure of electronic storage media or the seizure or copying of electronically stored information, the inventory may be limited to describing the physical storage media that were seized or copied. The officer may retain a copy of the electronically stored information that was seized or copied. The judge upon request shall deliver a copy of the inventory to the person from whom or from whose premises the property was taken and to the applicant for the warrant. (VII) A warrant under Rule 41(b) may authorize the seizure of electronic storage media or the seizure or copying of electronically stored information. Unless otherwise specified, the warrant authorizes a later review of the media or information consistent with the warrant. The time for executing the warrant in Rule 41(d)(5)(VI) refers to the seizure or on-site copying of the media or information, and not to any later off-site copying or review. (e) Motion for Return of Property and to Suppress Evidence. A person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure may move the district court for the county where the property was seized for the return of the property and to suppress for use as evidence anything so obtained on the ground that: (1) The property was illegally seized without warrant; or (2) The warrant is insufficient on its face; or (3) The property seized is not that described in the warrant; or (4) There was not probable cause for believing the existence of the grounds on which the warrant was issued; or (5) The warrant was illegally executed. The judge shall receive evidence on any issue of fact necessary to the decision of the motion. If the motion is granted the property shall be restored unless otherwise subject to lawful detention and it shall not be admissible in evidence at any hearing or trial. The motion to suppress evidence may also be made in the court where the trial is to be had. The motion shall be made and heard before trial unless opportunity therefor did not exist or the defendant was not aware of the grounds for the motion, but the court, in its discretion, may entertain the motion at the trial.
(f) Return of Papers to Clerk. The judge who has issued a warrant shall attach to the warrant a copy of the return, inventory, and all other documents in connection therewith, including any affidavit in application for the warrant, and shall file them with the clerk of the district court for the county of origin. If a case has been filed in the district court after issuance of the warrant, the clerk of the district court shall notify the clerk of the county court which issued it that the warrant has been filed in the district court. When the warrant has been issued by the county judge and there is no subsequent filing in the district court, after the issuance of the warrant, the documents shall remain in the county court. Any documents transmitted by fax or electronic transmission to the judge to obtain the warrant and the documents transmitted by the judge to the applicant shall be filed with the clerk of the court. (g) Suppression of Confession or Admission. A defendant aggrieved by an alleged involuntary confession or admission made by him, may make a motion under this Rule to suppress said confession or admission. The motion shall be made and heard before trial unless opportunity therefor did not exist or defendant was not aware of the grounds for the motion, but the court, in its discretion, may entertain the motion at the trial. The judge shall receive evidence on any issue of fact necessary to the decision of the motion. (h) Scope and Definition. This Rule does not modify any statute, inconsistent with it, regulating search, seizure, and the issuance and execution of search warrants in circumstances for which special provision is made. - See C.R.S. 16-3-310.
- See People v. Marshall (Colo. 2012) .
- See People v. Aarness (Colo. 2006) .
- See People v. McKinstry (Colo. 1993) .
- See People v. Glick (Colo. 2011) .
- See People v. Russom (Colo. App. 2004) . SB23-254.
- See People v. Tomaske (Colo. 2019) 440 P.3d 444. People v. Schendorf (Colo. 2026) No. 22CA1785.
- See People v. McFall (1983) . Wong Sun v. United States (1963) 83 S.Ct 407.
- See People v. Gow (Color. App. 2016) 442 P.3d 916.
- See People v. Tallent (Colo. 2008) .