The Colorado Supreme Court reversed an Arapahoe County judge on Monday who found law enforcement conducted an unconstitutional search of a man’s trunk, with the justices instead concluding police had grounds to believe a recently fired gun was inside.

Prosecutors have charged Sheron Mario Furness with seven criminal counts related to drug and weapon possession, stemming from an August 2022 incident outside a Centennial hotel.

Late that night, a sheriff’s deputy happened to be driving by at the same time someone fired four gunshots. After talking with people in front of the hotel, the deputy went around back. He and a second deputy looked around for shell casings and also spoke with Furness, who was standing near a vehicle with a friend.

The deputies did not locate any shell casings, but Furness claimed he had seen someone shoot a gun and leave on foot. During the encounter, the deputies observed:

• Furness allegedly smelled like alcohol

• Furness was missing the keys to his car, which the deputies found in the grass where they had been searching for shell casings

• The windows on his car were down at first, but at some point were rolled up

• Furness volunteered there was “no gun in” the vehicle

• An empty whiskey bottle and gun case were visible from outside the car

The deputies learned Furness had a restraining order prohibiting him from consuming alcohol, and they arrested him on suspicion of violating that order. Another deputy who joined the investigation then spoke with a witness who identified Furness as the shooter.

The deputies decided they had probable cause to search Furness’ vehicle for evidence of the shooting. Inside the occupants’ compartment, they found suspected bags of cocaine and methamphetamine. The gun case contained an empty magazine. In the trunk was a handgun with four rounds missing from the magazine.

The defense then moved to exclude the trunk evidence from trial, alleging law enforcement violated Furness’ Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures. District Court Judge LaQunya L. Baker acknowledged police may search an entire vehicle without a warrant if they believe it contains evidence of a crime, including the trunk.

However, Baker wrote that she “cannot find a single fact that would support a probable cause finding for a warrantless search of Mr. Furness’ trunk.”

Baker elaborated there was no access to the trunk from the occupants’ compartment, so it was unreasonable to think the evidence of illegal activity seen in the car would extend to the trunk. She also believed the “level of controlled substances” found in the occupants’ compartment did not suggest there were more drugs or weapons elsewhere.

The prosecution appealed directly to the Supreme Court, arguing Baker’s focus on the trunk access and the amount of drugs was too narrow. Furness’ lawyers responded that it was illogical to think Furness could have stashed a weapon in the trunk without the deputies’ knowledge, as he did not have his keys and no one saw Furness open the trunk.

“Assuming something is possible is not evidence,” wrote his public defenders.

The district attorney’s office countered that no evidence existed that the car was locked — and the fact the windows were open when the first deputies arrived suggested Furness could open the trunk without his keys.

“It is reasonably believable that Furness shot the gun, returned to his vehicle, and placed the gun in the trunk in the same time period it took (the first deputy) to report gunshots, arrive at the front hotel from a block away, speak to witnesses, and then drive to the rear of the hotel,” wrote Deputy District Attorney Laura Wood.

The Supreme Court agreed.

“The district court’s ruling is premised on the notion that Furness could not have hidden a gun in the trunk after the shots were fired because he did not have access to the trunk. Based on our review of the record, that premise is unfounded,” wrote Justice Maria E. Berkenkotter in the April 14 opinion.

She echoed the prosecution’s observation that it was possible Furness’ car was unlocked and he placed the gun in the trunk before the deputies located his keys. Even if the car was locked, the rolled-down windows could have allowed someone to open the trunk from inside before law enforcement showed up.

“Accordingly, we conclude that under the totality of the circumstances, it was reasonable for the officers to believe that there was a gun in the trunk,” Berkenkotter wrote.

The case is People v. Furness.