Summary
This Colorado Court of Appeals opinion determines whether a bail bondsman who secured entry to an apartment by impersonating law enforcement committed first-degree criminal trespass. The court concluded that gaining entry through ruse, trickery, or deception constitutes an unlawful entry under the state statute. Although the defendant cannot be retried due to double jeopardy protections, the appellate division disapproved the district court's grant of a judgment of acquittal, finding sufficient evidence existed for a jury conviction.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether entry obtained by ruse, trickery, or deception constitutes "unlawful" entry for purposes of first‑degree criminal trespass under C.R.S. § 18‑4‑502(1)(a).
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to support a jury finding that Hill knowingly entered unlawfully.
Holdings
- If a person secures permission to enter a dwelling by means of ruse, trickery, or deception, the entry is unlawful for purposes of first‑degree criminal trespass.
- The evidence was sufficient for a reasonable juror to find that Hill knowingly entered unlawfully.
Key quotations
“If a person secures permission to enter a dwelling by means of ruse, trickery, or deception, the person enters “unlawfully” for purposes of first degree criminal trespass, § 18‑4‑502(1)(a), C.R.S. 2024.” (at 15)
“The jury could reasonably have inferred that Hill used his clothing and manner as a way to deceive the Perry employees into believing he was a law‑enforcement officer to obtain their permission and assistance to enter the apartment.” (at 21)
Factual background
Kenneth Maurice Hill, a bail bondsman, entered an apartment belonging to Jose Madrid's brother by telling property‑manager employees that he was a fugitive‑recovery agent with a warrant. The employees, believing he was law‑enforcement, gave him permission to enter. Hill then confronted Madrid, who produced a gun, and Hill fired his weapon. Hill moved for judgment of acquittal, which the district court granted.
Procedural history
The district court granted Hill's motion for judgment of acquittal on the first‑degree criminal trespass charge. The People appealed, arguing the district court erred on the mens rea requirement and on the sufficiency of the evidence.