CO: Vague description in arrest warrant didn’t justify def’s stop

The description of an arrestee as a 30ish male with the last name starting in “Mc” didn’t justify defendant’s detention in a park. People v. McGee, 2026 CO 14 (Mar. 9, 2026):

¶17 We hold that, under the totality of the circumstances, the officers lacked probable cause to arrest McGee because the description used to arrest him lacked sufficient specificity to identify him as the suspect.

¶18 True, the police had specific information related to the suspect: his birth date and the fact that his last name begins with “Mc.” But they did not arrest McGee based on this information. Instead, they arrested McGee because he was a male in his thirties who arrived on a scooter at Rolland Moore Park within twenty-four minutes of the scheduled meeting time. Indeed, the officers based their arrest exclusively on this information. Only after arresting McGee did the officers question him about his identity; importantly, they did not confirm his name or birth date prior to the arrest.

¶19 The People argue that overwhelming evidence of the committed offense and the descriptors available to the police at the time of the arrest justified the officers’ belief that McGee was the person who committed the offense. We disagree.

¶20 It is true that A.H.’s age, her account of her online and in-person communication and contacts with the suspect, and the Discord conversations provided more than ample evidence for a reasonably cautious officer to believe a suspect had committed sexual crimes. Hence, we agree that the People presented sufficient evidence that an offense had been committed. But the People failed to present sufficient evidence that they identified McGee with the specific information they had as the person who had committed the offense. That is, the People did not establish a nexus between McGee and the crime committed in order to establish probable cause. See King, 16 P.3d at 813.