Editor’s Note: Law Week Colorado edits court opinion summaries for style and, when necessary, length.
Mackenzie Gillespie appealed her convictions of one count of aggravated animal cruelty and one count of animal cruelty.
Among other things, Gillespie contended that her felony conviction wasn’t supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court reversibly erred by failing to suppress evidence discovered during an allegedly unconstitutional intrusion onto the curtilage of her home. The Colorado Court of Appeals partially agreed with Gillespie on both points.
The appeals court held that while the prosecution presented sufficient evidence to support a finding that Gillespie “knowingly torture[d]” her dog, it didn’t present sufficient evidence to support a finding that she “knowingly … needlessly kill[ed]” it.
Regarding Gillespie’s Fourth Amendment argument, the appeals court concluded that the responding officer’s discovery of the dead dog occurred during a proper “knock and talk” at Gillespie’s property, but that his reentry onto the property to collect evidence was an unconstitutional search in the absence of a warrant.
The appeals court found that the trial court erred by denying Gillespie’s motion to suppress the result of the officer’s unconstitutional search and that the error wasn’t harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
The appeals court reversed and remanded for a new trial.