Colorado Court of Appeals People v. Dutton 11CA1456

Decision here.

   Dutton was an HTO who drove recklessly to avoid a traffic stop whilst driving in a car that he may or may not have owned (he was in the middle of a civil dispute over it).  Later, he would speak via phone to the officer who tried stop him and say some things that he would live to regret at the trial.  That same officer also picked Dutton out of a photo lineup as the driver.

   Whoever heard of showing a cop a photo lineup?  

   Anyway, Dutton appealed his conviction.  He argued that testimony about the phone call should not have been admitted as evidence because it was insufficiently substantiated as coming from him.  The rule in these things is that when a caller identifies themselves as a certain person, and this identification is supported by circumstantial evidence (such as the timing of the call, or the caller knowing things about the case that the suspect would know), then that's good enough to get the phone call admitted at trial and then the jury can decide if they think the call was legit.  So the call was admitted.

   Dutton also argued that the evidence wasn't enough to show that he was driving recklessly.  The court of appeals ruled that even though the pursuit only lasted a couple of blocks, the multiple traffic violations and the fact that he almost hit a pedestrian were enough to support the elements of reckless driving.  Anyone surprised by this?

   Convictions affirmed.