v. Avila

Citations

• 2019 COA 145

Syllabus

Defendant was asked to leave a bar, and when she refused, staff called police. The police questioned defendant outside the bar. She appeared upset and intoxicated, and without prompting said, \I don't have anything on me.\ When the police conducted a pat down, defendant resisted and was arrested. The police search of defendant produced what was later identified as cocaine. A jury found her guilty of possessing a controlled substance and resisting arrest. On appeal, defendant contended that insufficient evidence supported her conviction for possessing a controlled substance. She asserted that the evidence only established that she had a residue of cocaine, and it was insufficient to support a jury inference that she knowingly possessed it. Even if the evidence didn't establish that the cocaine powder was a usable quantity, the jury could have inferred knowing possession from the cocaine's location and packaging and defendant's evasive behavior and comments. Defendant also contended that the district court erred in denying her challenge for cause as to prospective juror E.D. because he was legally biased as a \compensated employee of a public law enforcement agency.\ E.D. was an employee of the Homeland Security Fusion Center, which is not a public law enforcement agency within the meaning of CRS § 16-10-103(1)(k). Therefore, the court didn't err in denying defendant's challenge for cause as to E.D. Defendant further contended that the district court's reasonable doubt illustrations during voir dire impermissibly lessened the prosecutor's burden of proof, violating her right to due process. Here, the court's illustrations didn't lower the prosecution's burden of proof because in the context of the entire record, the trial court properly instructed the jury on the law. Defendant also argued that the district court plainly erred by refusing to declare a mistrial because two prospective jurors exposed the jury to extraneous information about the arresting officer during