A Boulder man will receive a new trial after Colorado’s second-highest court determined last month that a pair of detectives improperly detained and interrogated him about an attempted sex assault instead of simply collecting his DNA as a court authorized them to do.

Angel Adrian Castro-Velasquez is serving 18 years to life in prison on multiple offenses stemming from his alleged entry into the victim’s bedroom, assaulting her and attempting to rape her. Law enforcement questioned Castro at his home until he eventually confessed.

However, a three-judge panel for the Court of Appeals found the detectives effectively exploited a narrow court order they obtained to collect DNA and photos of Castro, and expanded it to an interrogation in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Under Colorado’s criminal rules, law enforcement may obtain an order for “nontestimonial identification,” authorizing them to pursue a person’s fingerprint, blood specimen, handwriting sample, picture or other evidence that does not stem from an interrogation.

Notably, police only need to demonstrate “reasonable grounds,” not probable cause, that their target committed an offense.

Upon securing a nontestimonial identification order for Castro in February 2020, Detectives Kevin Marples and Kara Wills arrived at Castro’s house after notifying him by phone of their intent. Marples later testified he lacked probable cause to arrest Castro for the attempted rape at the time.

Instead of moving to collect the evidence authorized by the order, the detectives interrogated Castro for approximately 30 minutes. He eventually confessed, after which they executed the order.

The defense moved to exclude Castro’s statements, but then-District Court Judge Norma A. Sierra denied the motion.

On appeal, Castro argued the detectives manipulated the order to detain and interrogate him without probable cause. Such conduct allegedly violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable seizures.

“The testimony of the officers were like, ‘Yeah, we were gonna use this order and we were gonna go and gather information,'” observed Judge Neeti V. Pawar during oral arguments to the Court of Appeals panel. “It can be interpreted to be read as, ‘We were exploiting the order to go beyond its scope.’”

The panel concluded Castro was seized during the encounter, meaning he would not have felt able to leave or disregard the detectives’ questioning. Although police were not prohibited from investigating Castro further, wrote Judge Anthony J. Navarro, they could not interrogate him under the narrow authorization of the nontestimonial identification order.

“Overall, the record reveals that the detectives intentionally elicited Castro’s statements about the alleged offenses while he was detained on less than probable cause,” Navarro wrote in the June 20 opinion. “We cannot condone it.”

The panel reversed Castro’s convictions and ordered a new trial with Castro’s confession excluded.

The case is People v. Castro-Velasquez.