District Court, Chaffee County, Colorado P.O. Box 279 142 Crestone Avenue Salida, CO 81201 DATE FILED: May 5, 2021 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF oO COLORADO vs. DEFENDANT: Barry Lee Morphew Case Number: IN RE: Arrest Warrant/Arrest Warrant Affidavit ECSO 20000911 Div.: 2 Ctrm. Attomey Tor Plaintiff Name: Linda Stanley, District Attorney, Jeffrey D. Lindsey, Senior Deputy District Attorney Eleventh Judicial District ‘Address: 104 Crestone Ave., Salida, CO 81201 Phone Number: (719)539-3563 Fax Number: (719)539-3565 Atty. Reg. #45298 MOTION TO SEAL ARREST WARRANT AFFIDAVIT AND ARREST WARRANT COME NOW, The People of the State of Colorado, by and through District Attorney Linda Stanley, and move the Court as follows 1. The arrest warrant affidavit filed with this Motion and Order involves an active investigation of a missing person, namely Suzanne Morphew. The investigation is ongoing 2. The People are extremely concerned that if this arrest warrant is made public the suspect may flee the jurisdiction, possibly even the United States. Upon information and belief, the suspect has liquidated his assets in Chaffee County and limited working at his business and his subcontracting job in this jurisdiction. Allegedly, Mr. Morphew has sold his house on Puma Path Drive and netted over ‘one million dollars. Mr. Morphew has recently purchased several newer vehicles, Undersigned has further received information that Mr. Morphew took his Bobcat to Indiana and has made noises about leaving to Arizona. 3. The People respectfully request the Court accept the application under seal, and that the Court order that the arrest warrant affidavit and retum currently filed remain under seal until the Defendant’s first appearance before this Honorable Court or until further order of the Court, provided that law enforcement personnel be permitted to serve such warrant upon the suspect.RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 4" day of May 2021 /s/ Linda Stanley, Jeffrey D. Lindsey By: Linda Stanley, District Attorney, #45298 Jeffrey D. Lindsey, Senior Deputy District Attorney #24664District Court, Chaffee County, Colorado P.O. Box 279 ay 5, 2021 142 Crestone Avenue DATE FILED: May $, 2 Salida, CO 81201 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO vs. DEFENDANT: Barry Lee Morphew Case Number: CCSO 20000911 IN RE: Arrest Warrant/Arrest Warrant Affidavit Div: 2 Cum, Attorney for Plaintiff Name: Linda Stanley, District Attomey, Jeffrey D. Lindsey, Senior Deputy District Attomey Eleventh Judicial District Address: 104 Crestone Ave., Salida, CO 81201 Phone Number: (719)539-3563 Fax Number: (719)539-3565 Atty. Reg. #45298 ORDER TO SEAL ARREST WARRANT AFFIDAVIT AND ARREST WARRANT. THIS MATTER, coming before the Court on the People's Motion and Order to Seal: ‘The Arrest Warrant Affidavit and Arrest Warrant for Barry Lee Morphew, the Court does hereby GRANT the motion this: 4th day of May 2021. ‘The Warrant and supporting documents shall remain under seal until the suspect makes his first appearance at Advisement before the Honorable Court or until otherwise ordered by the Court. Sif. ¢ (Af,DISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, CO OLORAQO DATE FILED? May's 202-425 PM 142 Crestone Ave, Silida, CO 81201 | (719) 539-2561 - PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Plaintiff , | Barry Lee Morphew, Defendant _ ACOURT USE ONLY A Altarne for Defendant Daniel Zettler #32388 hos Magdalena Rosa, #31716 Case No: 21CR78 Deputy State Public Defender . MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC Division: Felony | DEFENDER 8044 W. Hwy 50, Suite 100 Salida, Colorado 81201 Phone: (719) 539-3521_Fax: (719) 539-4597 NOTICE OF INVOCATION OF ALL STATUTORY, CASE LAW, AND CONSTITUTIONAL PRIVILEGES [D-3] 1. Mr. Morphew by and through counsel, hereby notifies the District Attorney's Office and/or all law enforcement agencies of its intent to specifically invoke the following privileges a All medical and psychiatric, including drug or alcohol treatment, privileges afforded to Defendant under the Colorado and United States Constitutions and Section 13-90-107 of the Colorado Revised Statutes as to all medical and/or psychiatric treatment Defendant has ever received. b. All privileges in school, military, probation, prison, social services, or any other records Defendant has a confidentiality expectation through Federal and State statutes and case law, administrative regulations ot rules, or Federal and State constitutional provisions, or the agencies own statements to Defendant, either otal or written.Respectfully Submitted, MRGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER S: Daniel Zettler Daniel Zettler (32388) Deputy State Public Defender Certificate of Service: I certify that on May 5, 2021 I served the foregoing document through the Colorado Courts E- Filing system on all opposing parties of record, sL DFZDISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORARO PATE MED: Mays; 2021 4:23PM 142 Crestone Ave, Salida, CO 81201 (119) 539-2561 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Plaintiff | Barry Lee Morphew, | Defendant jo ACOURT USE ONLY A Altorne, for Defendant Daniel Zettler #32388 Magdalena Rosa, #31716 Deputy State Public Defender MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER 8044 W, Hwy 50, Suite 100 Salida, Colorado 81201 Phone: (719) 539-3521 Fax: (719) 539-4597 l Case No: 21CR78 Division: Felony NOTICE OF REPRESENTATION [D-2] Mr. Morphew notifies the Office of the District Attorney and any other law enforcement personnel or their agents to (a) obtain the consent of Defendant's counsel before attempting to contact or interview Defendant and (b) give said counsel reasonable opportunity to be present PRIOR to any contact with Defendant. As grounds, Defendant states: 1, ‘The Office of the State Public Defender hereby enters its appearance as Counsel for Barry Lee Morphew via election based on his in-custody status, 2. Defendant invokes Defendant's right to counsel and right to remain silent under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the Colorado and United States Constitutions. Defendant does not wish to be interviewed, contacted, or questioned unless Defendant's attorney is present This includes crimes or circumstances which the State or law enforcement believe are unrelated to the crime for which Defendant is in custody. Defendant specifically requests that pursuant to said amendments that Defendant's counsel make the determination as to any matters which impact his constitutional rights 3. Consent of opposing counsel is required by Disciplinary Rule 4.2 of the Code of Professional Responsibility 4, Defendant requests that this notice of representation be communicated to all agencies that the prosecution’s Rules 16(a)(3) and (b)(4) of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure obligations extend to and that those persons or agencies be directed by the prosecution to comply with the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments pertaining to Defendant. 5 Defendant wishes to exercise both Defendant's right to silence (and against self- incrimination) and Defendant's right to counsel under the Federal and State Constitutions,Respectfully Submitted, MRGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER S: Daniel Zettler Daniel Zettler (32388) Deputy State Public Defender Certificate of Service: I certify that on May 5, 2021 T served the foregoing document through the Colorado Courts E- Filing system on all opposing partics of record. és/DIRespectfully Submitted, Mean A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER S: Daniel Zettler Daniel Zettler (32388) Deputy State Public Defender Certificate of Service: I certify that on May 5, 2021 1 served the foregoing document through the Colorado Courts E~ Filing system on all opposing parties of record, (sf DEZ‘DISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORAQO — PATE PILED: May’5, 2021 4:23 PX 142 Crestone Ave, Salida, CO 81201 (719) 539-2561 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Plaintiff | Barry Lee Morphew, | Defendant i} _ ACOURT USE ONLY A Altorngs for Defendant Daniel Zettler #32388 Magdalena Rosa, #31716 Deputy State Public Defender MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEPENDER 8044 W. Hwy 50, Suite 100 | Salida, Colorado 81201 | Phone: (719) 539-3521 _Fax: (719) 539-4597 | | :NTRY OF APPEARANCE, NOTICE OF ELECTION, AND REQUEST FOR | PROOF EVIDENT PRESUMPTION GREAT HEARING [D-1] Case No: 21CR78 Division: Felony The Office of the Colorado State Public Defender hereby enters an appearance on behalf of Barry Lee Morphew, Defendant. Mr. Morphew hereby requests a preliminary hearing pursuant to CRS. § 16-5-301(1) and Rule 5(a)(4) of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure, as. well as a proof evident presumption great hearing pursuant to CRS. § 16-4-101) ‘Mr. Morphew is in custody and cannot post bond, as no bond is presently set. Pursuant to Chief Justice Directive 04-04(IID, the Office of the State Public Defender is automatically entering to represent Mr. Morphew. Farther, no bond has yet been set and it is anticipated that the Prosecution will request that Mr, Morphew be held without bail during the pendency of his cases. Mr. Morphew has the right to @ heating at which “the burden shall be upon the people to establish that the proof is evident of that the presumption is great. The court may combine in a single hearing the questions as to whether the proof is evident or the presumption great with the determination of the existence of probable cause to believe that the defendant committed the crime charged.” CRS. § 16-4-101@). Mr. Motphew requests the Court order the prosecuting attorney to provide all discovery critical to the issues at the proof evident/ presumption is great hearing no later than thirty days prior to the hearing and produce all discovery under C.R.CR.P Rule 16 Part I (a)(1), (IV), and (VU), as soon as practicable but no later than 21 days after Mr. Morphew's first appearanceRespectfully Submitted, MGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATR. PUBLIC DEFENDER S: Daniel Zettler Daniel Zettler (32388) Deputy State Public Defender Certificate of Service: I certify that on May 5, 2021 T served the foregoing document through the Colorado Courts E= Filing system on all opposing parties of record, (s/ DEZMEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER S: Daniel Zettler Daniel Zettler (32388) Deputy State Public Defender Certificate of Service: I certify that on May 5, 2021 T served the foregoing document through the Colorado Courts E= Filing system on all opposing parties of record, DEZ‘DISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORAQO PATE PIEEDY May's, 2021-451 PM 142 Ctestone Ave, Salida, CO 81201 | 719) 539-2561 | PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, | Plaintgt Barry Lee Morphew, Defendant ACOURT USE ONLY A “Altar for Defendant T | Magdalen, ova 231716 GaseNor 21CR78 Deputy State Public Defender MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC D) 8044 W. Hwy 50, Suite 100 Salida, Colorado 81201 | Phone: (719) 539-3521 _ Fax: (719) 539-4597 Division: Felony MOTION FOR COURT TO ORDER THE RELEASE OF ALL SEARCH | WARRANTS, AFFIDAVITS, AND PROPERY INVENTORIES ([D-4] Barry Morphew through counsel, respectfully requests this Court order the Clerk of Courts for Chaffee County to provide access to Counsel via e-filing, and copies upon request, of all arrest ‘warrants, search warrants, associated affidavits, and property inventories under C.R.Crim.P. 41 (€)(5) (VD) and so that Mr. Morphew can receive effective assistance of counsel. Counsel request these documents remain sealed to non parties and that the parties are not to disseminate the materials to any parties not ditectly involved in the investigation, litigation, or defense of the case absent further order of the Court:MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO Stare PUBLIC DE S: Daniel Zettler Daniel Zettler (32388) Deputy State Public Defender Certificate of Service: I certify that on May 5, 2021 T served the foregoing document through the Colorado Courts E= Filing system on all opposing parties of record. AprDISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORARO DATE FILED way 5; 2021-s:25- ent) 142 Crestone Ave, Salida, CO 81201 (719) 539-2561 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Plaintiff Barry Lee Morphew, Defindant ACOURT USE ONLY A Altere) jor Defendant Daniel Zettler #32388 . Magdalena Rosa, #31716 CaseNo: — 21CR78 Deputy State Public Defender Divison: Felony MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER 8044 W, Hwy 50, Suite 100 Salida, Colorado 81201 Phone: (719) 539-3521_ Fax: (719) 539-4597 | MEDIA COVERAGE AT ANY AND ALL HEARINGS [D-5) Barry Morphew through counsel, objects to any and all request for expanded media coverage . In support of this motion, Mr. Morphew states the following: | OBJECTION TO ALL REQUESTS FOR EXPANDED 1, Mr. Morphew anticipates that multiple media agencies will ile requests for expanded media coverage. 2, Mr. Morphew has been arrested for first-degree murder. 3. Mr. Morphew objects to any and all request for expanded media coverage for the following reasons: a. There is a reasonable likelihood that expanded media coverage would interfere with the rights of the parties, Mr. Morphew in particular, and his right to a fair trial; b, The request would detract from the solemnity, decorum, and dignity of the Court; ©. Expanded media coverage would create adverse effects that are greater than those caused by traditional media coverage.MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER S: Daniel Zettler Daniel Zettler (32388) Deputy State Public Defender Certificate of Service: I certify that on May 5, 2021 T served the foregoing document through the Colorado Courts E- Filing system on all opposing partics of record.[DISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORARO — DATE FILED: May's, 2021 S40 Pt 142 Crestone Ave, Salida, CO 81201 (719) 539-2561 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, | Plaintiff | v Barry Lee Morphew, Defendant ACOURT USE ONLY A Aitorne for Defendant | Danici Zettler #32388 I arena Magdalena Rosa, #31716 Case No: 21CR78 Deputy State Public Defender MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER 8044 W, Hwy 50, Suite 100 Salida, Colorado 81201 | Phone: (719) 539-3521 Fax: (719) 539-4597 Division: Felony MOTION FOR PRESERVATION OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE[D-6) Mr. Morphew, by and through counsel, respectfully requests this Court order the Office of the District Attorney to preserve all physical evidence collected in this case. Additionally, Mr. Morphew specifically requests an order to preserve any remaining biological samples collected or obtained from any source. Further, Mr. Morphew requests notice and a hearing prior to the testing of any physical evidence if consumptive to degree independent testing by the defense would not be possible. or prior to release of such evidence.MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER S: Daniel Zettler Daniel Zeitler (32388) Deputy State Public Defender Cettificate of Service: I certify that on May 5, 2021 1 served the foregoing document through the Colorado Courts E- Filing system on all opposing parties of record,District Court, Chaffee County, Colorado T 142 Crestone Avenue Salida, Colorado 81201 batt rico May 6, 2021 10:54 AM ee toro sonar People of the State of Colorado v, | Barry Lee Morphew, Defendant | Prepared by the Court; Hon. Patrick W. Murphy Chief Judge, 11" Judicial District Chaffee County, Colorado Case No. 21CR78 ORDER RE: REQUEST FOR EXPANDED MEDIA COVERAGE | t > 7 - This matter comes before the Court for consideration of numerous requests for expanded media coverage of the advisement scheduled for May 6, 2021. Having reviewed the requests, having heard from the parties and after considering applicable authority, the Court finds, concludes and orders as follows: Standard for Authorizing Expanded Media Coverage Chapter 38, Rule 3 of the Colorado Court Rules provides the standard for authorizing expanded media coverage. In determining whether expanded media coverage should be permitted, a judge shall consider the following factors: (A) Whether there is a reasonable likelihood that expanded media coverage would interfere with the rights of the parties to a fair trial; (B) Whether there is a reasonable likelihood that expanded media coverage would unduly detract from the solemnity, decorum and dignity of the court; and (C) Whether expanded mediaCoverage would create adverse effects which would be greater than those caused by traditional media coverage. Discussion/Analysis Having considered the above listed three factors, the Court finds that expanded media coverage should be permitted, with reasonable restrictions, consistent with Chapter 38, Rule 3 of the Colorado Court Rules Specifically. the Court concludes that expanded media coverage will not interfere with the rights of the parties to a fair trial. The disappearance of Suzanne Morphew. the subsequent investigation and the recent arrest of the Defendant have already garnered significant media attention--in Chaffee County, in Colorado and nationwide. Allowing the Defendant's advisement to be filmed will no, in Court's view, significantly increase the media's or the Public’s awareness of, or attention to this case. + from the The Court concludes that expanded media coverage will not unduly detra solemnity, decorum or dignity of the court. See restrictions on expanded media coverage below The Court concludes that expanded media coverage will not create adverse effects which ‘would be greater than those caused by traditional media coverage. Again, there will be Significant limitations set on the single camera that will be allowed in the courtroom, Finally, the Court is mindful that the inception of this case coincides with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, Due to local public health orders, social distancing of at least six feet for those who do not live together must be enforced in the courtroom, This severely limits the number of people who can enter and remain in the courtroom (the gallery is limited to 8 individuals if not from the same household). ‘The Court will give priority to seating members ofthe Morphew family and members of the defense/prosecution teams, It is quite possible that only a very few members of the general public will be allowed in the courtroom to observe the Proceedings in person (although the proceedings will be broadcast via WebEx), Because public, ‘n-Person attendance of the advisement will be severely limited, the Court further concludes that expanded media coverage of the proceedings is appropriate The Court has been made aware that the Morphew children are likely o attend and make statement at the hearing. The Court does not want images of the Morphew children, one of whom is a minor, to be recorded or broadcast nor does the Court believe there is a viable, recognizable reason to allow recording of their images, Expanded Media Coverage Restrictions Expanded media coverage shall be conducted only under the following conditions. The Court maintains final approval of all arrangements: '- Video. The Court has accepted the expanded media request of KUSA—simply because the Court received that request before all others. KUSA shall be given access tothe courtroom, prior "0 the hearing to setup their equipment withthe direction ofthe Court and input from the parties iFthey so desire, KUSA shall be responsible for pooling pursuant tothe arrangements outlined below. There shall be only one camera in the courtroom. Only one person shall be permitted to operate the camera, The camera operator may use a tripod but shall not change location while Court is in session, If the Morphew children attend the hearing and speak at the hearing, the camera must be turned off, capped or moved in a manner that will not allow images of the Morphew children to be recorded.2. Audio. No audio recording of any kind shall he permitted at any time in the courtroom, 3. Still Cameras. No still cameras will be allowed in the Courtroom 4 Lighting. No movie lights, flash attachments, or sudden lighting changes shall be permitted No modification or addition of lighting equipment shall be allowed, 5. Operating Signals. No visible or audible light or signal (tally light) shall be used on any equipment. § Zoom Photography. There shall be no zoom ot close-up photography or videography of any bench conferences or conferences between Defendant and his counsel . Pos Arrangements. KUSA shall be solely responsible for arranging an open and impartial distribution scheme with a distribution point located outside of the courthouse. Ifno agreement can be reached on either of these matters. there shall be no expanded media cov erage, Neither Judges nor other court personnel shall be called upon to resolve any disputes conceming pooling arrangements. § Conduct of KUSA representative. Equipment employed to provide expanded media coverage shall be positioned and operated so as to minimize any distraction Identifying marks, call letters. logos, symbols, and legends shall be concealed on all equipment. Persons operating such equipment shall not wear clothing bearing any such identifying information. No equipment used ‘© Provide expanded media coverage shall be placed in, or removed from, the courtroom while Court is in session. No film, videotape, or lens shall be changed within the courtroom while. Court isin session, Members of the media may utilize personal di igital a sistants (PDAs), 'aptops. tablets, and notebooks in the courtroom with wireless capabilities so long as it creates no disruption during the course of the proceedingf . ves f 2021 Done in Chambers and dated this day of / BY THE DUR: 7 jf Prt Ah- Hon. Patrick W. Murphy ChiefJudge, 11" J.D. t ce:District Court, Chaffee County, Colorado 142 Crestone Avenue Salida, Colorado 81201 DATE FILED: May 6, 2021 4:07 PM Smee a People of the State of Colorado Barry Lee Morphew, Defendant Prepared by the Court: Hon. Patrick W. Murphy Chief Judge, 11" Judicial District $$ Chaffee County, Colorado Case No. 21CR78 ORDER RE: PUBLIC RELEASE OF ARREST AFFIDAVIT ‘The arrest affidavit in this case remains sealed upon the order of the Court. During discussions between the Court and counsel prior to today’s advisement it was agreed that the affidavit would be released to defense counsel immediately and this has since occurred Anticipating requests from the media and the public to unseal and release the affidavit, the Court requested that each side give their position on the issue. ‘The prosecution did not object ‘ounsealing the affidavit. Defense counsel requested time to read and review the affidavit before Stating their position. This was a reasonable request considering the length of the affidavit. ‘Therefore, the Court gave defense counsel seven days from today to note thei position regarding unsealing the affidavit. If defense counsel objects, the matter will be set for a hearing as soon as practicable,Done in Chambers and dated this (2 _ day of ce: Mx ZBunce! court D county Cour Boar cout C1 Deme vente Oden Distt Coun, Chattes Coury — DATE FILEDONHR #1E0D: [Gourt Address: Chaffee County Judicial Building E FILEDDNITE @12BDS: My BY2021 "a2 Csiro Avon Sala CO 12010000 Probate ‘RID, Do0az02 \¢R900078 - 090027 The People of the State of Colorado COURT USE ONLY A ase Number: 00082021CR0G0078 Delendant: MCRPHEW. BARRY LEE actives: lowision_2 MANDATORY PROTECTION ORDER PURSUANT TO §16-1-1001, C..S. Full name of Delondant Date ot | Sex | Race | Weigh] Height] Har | Eye brotected Party alleges Weapon involved Bicth color | color MORPHEW. BRARY LEE vor71s67] caw! w | 190 | sto | BiN | BLU Or Fatt name of Protecied Party Daic of Sex] Face ] Fullname of Protected Parly Dateot Pex [Race Birth Birth aw ew ‘The Court finds «tis appropriate to issue this Protection Order pursuant to §18:1-1001 The Court finds thar the Detenciant Qs Cis not governed by the Brady Handgun Violance Pravention Act, 18 U 9922 dy) and igy® srefore. itis ordered that you the Defendant: 1. Shali not harass, molest. nimidate. retaliate ag charged with commiting. 2. Shall vacate the home ot the victim(s) of witnessi@s), and stay away from any other location the vitim witness(2s] sare likely to be found, st oF tamper with any witness to or victim of the acts you are 3 Shall retrain rom contacting or directly of nditectly communicating wth the vetim(s) or witness(es}. ‘4, Shall not possess. purchase, of contol a tearm or other weapon ny ammunition 5. Shall nat possess or purchase B. Shallretrvnush, for the duration ol the order, any {tearm or ammunition °n your immadiats possession or cont diate possession oF control, and shall do so within hours) fer firearms ang or subject fo your immediate possession or control, and 1 ralinguish trearms and ammunition, the court within day(s) foc ammunition, Il you ar@ in custady and cannot relinquish id tion. t ‘pedo's you to do 80 within 24 nours of your release trom custody. You shall ile prool ofthe relnquishment ath tne court. within 3 business days ef the ralinquishment as required by statute 7 Shall not possess or consu’ 1e aloohole beverages oF controlled substances STORY PROTECTION ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO $18+1-1001, CRS Page 1013D6. tefurther ordered tht: Date: By signing, | acknowledge receipt of this Order Date: siogeozt - ‘cont thatthe Is « Bue and complete copy of he orginal order. Dotan: Date: sasv2021 _ a {Unt tna postion of he actor” means unl the cases camissed, unl the Delandant{e acgulted, o unt he Dalendent completes bi or er sentence, Any Defendant sentenced te probation i deomad have complaled his or her santanc upon aechange om Probation, & Delendant sentenced to Incarceration ix deamed to have completed his or hor tantanes upon release From Incarceration and decharge tram parola suparvslon(618-1-1001/8X), C8 8)IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT PROTECTION ORDERS THIS ORDER {S IN EFFECT UNTIL THE DISPOSITION OF THIS ACTION, OR IN THE CASE OF AN APPEAL, UNTIL THE DISPOSITION OF THE APPEAL. This order is accorded tull faith and credit and shall be enforced in every civil or criminal court of the United States, indian Tribe ar a United States Territory pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec, 2265 The issuing court has jurisdiction over the parties and the sudject matter. The Delendant has been given. reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard. NOTICE TO DEFENDANT ‘A knowing violation of a Protection Order is a crime under §18-6-803.5, C.R.S. A violation may subject you to fines of up to $5,000.00 and up to 18 months in jail. A violation will also consitute contempt of court You may be arrested without notice i a law enforcement otfier has probable cause to believe that you have knowingly violated this Order it you violate this Order thinking that a vietim or witness has given you perinission, you are wrong, and can be arrested and prosecuted The terms ofthis Order cannot be changed by agreement ofthe victim(s) or witness(es) Only the Court can change this Order. You may apply at any tine for the modification or dismissal ofthis Protection Order Possession of a firearm while this Protection Order is in effect or following a conviction of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. may constitute a felony under Federal Law 18 U.S.C. {§822(g)(8) and (9}(9) Firearm and ammunition relinuishment must be in accordance with §18-1-1001(9}(b). C.R.S. Failure to comply with the order to relinquish may result in an arcest warant NOTICE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ‘You shall use every reasonable means to entarce this Pratection Order. You shall arrest. or take into custody. or if an arrest would be impractical under the circumstances, seek a warrant for the arrest of the Defendant when you have information amounting to probable cause that the Defendant has violated or altempted to violale any provisions of this Order and the Oelendant has been properly served with a copy ot this Order or has received actual notice of the existence of this Order. ‘You shail entorce this Order even il there is no record of it in the Protection Order Central Registry, You shall taka the Detendant to the nearest jal or detention facili utilized by your agency You are authorized to use every reasonable eltort to protect the Protected Parties to prevent turther violence You may transport, or arrange transportation to a shelter for the Protected Parties, NOTICE TO PROTECTED PERSON You may request the prosecuting attorney to initiate contempt proceedings against the Defendant Ing 440 0813 MANOATORY PROTECTION ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO §18-1-1001, CRS Page 3 ot 3District Court, Chaffee County, Colorado Court Address: 142 CRESTONE AVE . SALIDA, CO 81201 DATE FILED: May 11, 2021 3:02 PM 719-539-2561 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Plaintiff v. BARRY MORPHEW. Defendant + COURT USE ONLY + Case Number: 21CR78 Courtroom DISTRICT ORDER RE: ENTRY OF APPEARANCE, NOTICE OF ELECTION, AND REQUEST FOR PROOF EVIDENT PRESUMPTION GREAT HEARING (D-1) The Court has previously appointed the Colorado State Public Defender to represent Mr. Morphew. The Court hereby orders the prosecuting attorney to provide all discovery pursuant to Rule 16 of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure. Specific issues regarding discovery may be raised by Motion ‘The Court orders the prosecution to produce all discovery under C.R.CR.P Rule 16 Part | (a)(1)(1), (IV), and (VID, as soon as practicable but no later than 21 days after Mr. Morphew's first appearance at the time of or following the filing of charges. cussed on the record, the setting of the proof evident/presumption great hearing will be discussed at the hearing set for May 27, 2021 at 4:00 p.m.District Court, Chaffee County, Colorado 142 Crestone Ave Salida, CO 81201 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE Plaintiff F COLORADO, DATE FILED: May 12, 3021 Magdalena Rosa #31716 Deputy State Public Defender MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DI INDER 8044 W. Hwy 50, Suite 100 Salida, Colorado 81201 Phone: (719) 539-3521 Fax: (719) 539-4597 MOTION TO LIMIT PUBLIC ACCESS TO ARREST FILED MAY 5, 2021 (D-7) v. BARRY MORPHEW, Defendant O COURT USE ONLY 0 ‘Attomey for Defendant Daniel Zettler #32388 Case No. 2021CR78. Division 2 WARRANT AFFIDAVIT Barry Morphew, through counsel, hereby moves to limit public access to the arrest warrant affidavit filed May 5, 2021, and moves for an order for the parties to file all factual averments in motions as suppressed filings available only to the parties or with all factual averments redacted. As grounds, therefore, it is stated as follows: I. INTRODUCTION 1, On May 5, 2021, District Attorney Linda Stanley filed a one hundred and twenty-nine page Affidavit for Arrest Warrant, authored by Alex Walker, Chief Investigator for the 11" Judicial District, Office of the District Attorney. 2. On May 5, 2021, the Court, based on a Motion to Seal filed by the prosecution, ordered the Affidavit for Arrest Warrant sealed until Mr. Morphew’s “first,appearance at advisement.” See Court Order to Seal Arrest Affidavit and Warrant, May 5, 2021 On May 6, 2021, at Mr. Morphew’s first appearance, the Court ordered the Affidavit for Arrest and Arrest Warrant remain sealed to the public and granted the parties seven days to file motions requesting they remain sealed. . This pleading requests the Affidavit for Arrest and Arrest Warrant remain sealed and access to the public denied until, at a minimum, the proof evident presumption great hearing and that all factual averments in pleading be sealed or redacted based on substantial interest of the alleged victims, the substantial interest of Mr. Morphew, the substantial interest of fair and impartial justice, and the substantial interest of the community, . Colo, R. Crim. P. $5.1, adopted December 17, 2020, effective May 10, 2021, authorizes the Court to limit public access in certain enumerated situations. ». Colo. R. Crim, P. $5.1 (a)(2) states that “a party may file a motion requesting that the court limit public access to a court record previously filed.” (Part (a)(1) addresses motions not previously filed but is substantially similar to Part (a)(2)). Colo. R. Crim. P. $5.1 (a)(2) states that “an opposing party wishing to object to the motion must file a response within 14 days after service of the motion unless otherwise directed by the court.” . Colo, R. Crim. P. $5.1 (a)(3) states that “a motion to limit public access shall identify the court record or any part of the court record the moving party wishes to make ina ssible to the public, state the reasons for the request, and specify how long the information identified should remain inaccessible to the public.”9. Colo. R. Crim. P. 55.1 Part (a)(6) requires the Court, when granting a request to seal, to issue a written order in which it: @ )) (at) specifically identifies one or more substantial interests served by making the court record inaccessible to the public or by allowing only a redacted copy of it to be accessible to the public; finds that no less restrictive means other than making the record inaccessible to the public or allowing only a redacted copy of it to be accessible to the public exists to achieve or protect any substantial interests identified; and concludes that any substantial interests identified override the presumptive public access to the court record or to an unredacted copy of it. 10. The rule contains certain procedural safeguards and requirements: a. Crim, P, $8.1 (a)(1) essentially requires that all pleadings by all parties regarding limiting public access must be filed as suppressed filings, which themselves will not be subject to public access. The rule states, “upon receiving the motion, the clerk shall make the subject court record inaccessible to the public pending the court's resolution of the motion, except that if'a party seeks to make inaccessible to the public only parts of the subject court record, then the party must also submit a redacted version of the court record with the motion and the clerk shall make the redacted version of the court record accessible to the public without undue delay. The clerk shall also make the motion and the response inaccessible to the public pending the court's resolution of the motion, except that, in its discretion, the court mayorder that the motion and the response, or redacted versions of the motion and the response, be accessible to the public during that timeframe.” I, SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST JUSTIFYING THE REQUEST TO SEAL THE AFFIDAVIT FOR ARREST WARRANT A. The unusual and inflammatory nature of the Arrest Affidavit L1, The Arrest Affidavit is unlike any other arrest affidavit counsel has ever reviewed. 12. The Arrest Affidavit is one hundred and forty nine pages long. It is written in an argumentative style; itis filled with irrelevant and salacious information; itis filled with inadmissible hearsay, opinions, and gossip. It is nothing more than an attempt to engage in prosecution through outright character assassination and by heightening public condemnation of Mr. Morphew. It reads more like an article written for a tabloid, intended to attract the attention of the media, and to convict based on inadmissible evidence, character assassination, rumors, and heightened public condemnation. The affidavit is inconsistent with a sworn statement of facts as, required by Crim. P. 4(a)(2). 13, Some of the lowlights of the affidavit include the following: “Barry's statements about his actions on the days before and after Suzanne's disappearance have been proven to be false and misleading by this investigation.” (This a conclusion rather than a fact, which neither the prosecution, nor a prosecution witness would not be allowed to utter at trial See Aff. p. 1; see also Wilson v. People, 743 P.2d 415 (Colo. 1987); Crider v. People, 186 P.3d 39, 41 (Colo. 2008)),b. “Suzanne's bicycle and helmet were recovered close to the Morphew residence, discarded before Barry left town in the early morning hours of May 10, 2020,” (This a conclusion and theory, rather than a fact. See id.). See Aff. pl c. Explicit recitations concerning the alleged victim's sexual affair with a man in Michigan . “Barry was shown the photos of nude women and sexual encounter dating sites recovered from his cell phone. He said he never had a dating website and the images and websites recovered must have been from pop-up ads when he was viewing pornography. Agents agreed such images and dating sites could have come from Barry viewing porn on his phone.” See Aff. P. 110, (inadmissible under CRE 401 and 403), “From December 2020 through April 2021, numerous Salida residents have reported that Darke is in a relationship with Barry. Their relationship is reported to date back to July 2020, though investigators have not confirmed that.” See Aff. P. 124, (inadmissible under CRE 401 and 403). £ The Affidavit contains details of statements made by Mr. Morphew to law enforcement on 1/27/2021, 1/28/2021, 2/28/2021, 3/1/2021, 3/5/2021, 3/10/2021, 4/5/2021, 4/22/2021. These statements were all obtained after law enforcement was aware Mr. Morphew was represented by counsel. See Aff. p. 55-56. g. The affidavit includes an incredible amount of information which has no relevancy to the case, which is pure inadmissible character assassination, andwhich will likely prejudice any and all potential jurors who review the affidavit For example a complaint that Mr. Morphew sold his business in 2018 before he moved to Colorado and the purchaser thought he had been fooled by Mr. Morphew into a bad business deal. See Aff. p.56. “Wimmer told Kyle to be careful because he had seen a lot of Barry deals go south. Kyle and his friend became defensive. Wimmer told them, “You are dealing with the devil.” See Aff. p. 57. “When Wimmer learned Suzanne was missing, he Googled Barry and read about all that was going on with her disappearance. Wimmer was intrigued by it and saw the Tyson Draper video. After Wimmer watched it he concluded Barry is “guilty, for sure.”" See Aff. p.57. “Wimmer said that Barry thinks he is a really good liar and he is not, Barry is the kind of person that will just stand there and “tell you something you know damn well is not true.’ Wimmer would ofien just listen and not contradict because he just did not want the conflict with Barry. Wimmer sent Barry a series of texts on September 23, 2020, accusing Barry of killing Suzanne and telling Barry he would rot in hell.” See Aff. p. 57.The affidavit contains the word “guilty” 14 times. The word innocent is never used once. The affidavit contains speculative guesses by witnesses numerous times. ‘The affidavit actually discusses evidence identified as rumors. See Aff. p.31 ‘The affidavit includes the height, weight and dates of birth of Mr. Morphew's minor daughter and his 21-year-old daughter even though their physical description has nothing whatsoever to do with the case. p.1. Release of this information would be in violation of C.R.S. § 24-4.1-303 (2) (“Upon request ofa victim, all correctional officials shall keep confidential the address, telephone number, place of employment, or other personal information of such victim or members of such victim’s immediate family.”). “Barry was asked to voluntarily submit to a polygraph examination, which he declined and said he would think about it, saying he ‘didn’t want to do anything that wasn't 100% accurate;’ he also said they ‘weren't admissible in court.”” This was included in the affidavit, which was reviewed by the District Attorney's Office, despite such evidence being inadmissible in Court. See Aff. P21; see also Mills v. People, 139 Colo. 397, 339 P.2d 998 (1959) (prohibits introduction in a criminal trial of evidence of an accused's refusal to submit to a lie detector test) Alleges that “[o]n January 7, 2020, Barry's phone searched ‘how to make a sible under CRE 401, 402, and girl orgasm utube.”” See Aff. p. 32. (Inadmis 403).n. Alleges that “[o]n January 24, 2020, Barry's phone searched ‘3rd base! My first hand job: Dear Teen Diary, 9th Grade, Entry 14 - You Tube.” See Aff. p. 32, (Inadmissible under CRE 401, 402, and 403). ©. Whether Mr. and Ms. Morphew would have orgasms every time they had sexual intercourse. See Aff. p.119. (Inadmissible under CRE 401, 402, and 403). p. SA Grusing said that in doing the victimology work on Suzanne, investigators know that was not the only time she came at Barry and that when Suzanne got frustrated, she would physically come at Barty. See Aff. p. 64, (Inadmissible under CRE 702). B. Protect the alleged victims [— and&— - 6 14 Pis y and . is _ . The nature of this case, including the disappearance of their Mother and the arrest of their Father, has resulted in extreme emotional distress. Both Tid pose release of the Affidavit noting that the impact would be “devastating,” and that they “can’t even begin to explain the extent of the emotional impact release of the affidavit would have.” Sealing the Affidavit will protect and hone; “wand _B consistent with the legislative and voter intent behind the Victim’s Rights Act. See Colorado Constitution, Article II, Section 16a — Rights of Crime Victims; see also C.R.S. § 24- 4.1-301 (“It is the intent of this part 3, therefore, to assure that all victims of and witnesses to crimes are honored and protected by law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and judges.”)16. Given the outrageous, salacious, and tabloid style of the Affidavit its release would violate(__B and right to be treated with “fairness, respect and dignity, and to be free from intimidation, harassment, or abuse, throughout the criminal justice process.” See id.; CR.S. § 24-4.1-302,5, C. The Affidavit if released would impede the ongoing investigations of the defense 17. Mr. Morphew is entitled to effective assistance of counsel, which includes the duty of counsel to investigate the matter in search of mitigation and exculpatory evidence. See 6th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution 18. As of the filing of this motion the defense has not had an opportunity to engage in any ‘meaningful investigations. Furthermore the defense has not yet received mandatory disclosures under C.R. Crim, P. 16, The defense investigation is ongoing and release of the Affidavit prior to defense investigation is likely to negatively impact that investigation. First, because of the tabloid style nature of the affidavit itis likely to bias any potential witnesses prior to defense interviews resulting in a refusal to cooperate or even worse an attempt to fabricate evidence or statements based on the review of the affidavit. 19. The prosecution cited an ongoing investigation as a basis for sealing the affidavit in their motion filed May 5, 2021. The prosecution has had almost a year to investigate the matter, while keeping the evidence sealed. Mr. Morphew is asking for the same opportunity as a matter of due process and basic faimessD. The Affidavit, if released by the Court unopposed by the District Attorney, is a potential violation of Colo. R. Prof. Cond. 3.8 (f): Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor 20. The affidavit was signed by Alex Walker, Chief Investigator for District Attorney Linda Stanley, the District Attorney for the 11" Judicial District. Mr, Walker affirms that the affidavit was reviewed by District Attommey Linda Stanley and Senior Deputy District Attorney Jeff Lindsey prior to its filing with the Court, 21. Colo. R. Prof. Cond. 3.8 (f) “Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor” states: “[E]xcept for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused unless such comments are permitted under Rule 3.6(b) or 3.6(c), and exercise reasonable care to prevent investigators, law enforcement personnel, employees or other persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor in a criminal case from making an extrajudicial statement that the prosecutor would be prohibited from making under Rule 3.6 or this Rule.” 22. The inflammatory, salacious, and inadmissible nature of the statements in the Affidavit, as approved and endorsed by District Attorney Linda Stanley would potentially constitute a violation of Colo. R. Prof. Cond. 3.8 (f) “Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor” and as such the prosecution should also be asking the Court not to release the affidavit to the public. Such a release would be providing extrajudicial comments that would have a substantial likelihood of heightening publie condemnation of Mr. Morphew, which is the clear intent of the affidavit. 10E. Preserve the right to a fair trial by impartial jurors 23. The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Colorado Constitution guarantee the rights of a person accused of a crime to have his or her case heard by an impartial jury, by independent people from the surrounding community who are willing to decide the case based only on the evidence. 24, The Affidavit is argumentative and salacious, iti filled with gossip, rumors, and information that will be inadmissible at trial. 25. The release of the Affidavit will create, consistent with its intended prosecutorial purpose, significant condemnation and bias in the local community and across the state of Colorado. Potential jurors will be flooded with biases and inflammatory information that will not be admissible at trial—bells that cannot be un-rung. Release of the Affidavit will negatively impact Mr. Morphew’s right to an impartial jury and fair trial by independent people from the surrounding community who are willing to decide the case based only on the evidence. FUTURE PLEADINGS 26. As this issue could reoccur if pleadings in the future simply restate the same inflammatory facts stated in the Affidavit, the defense moves for further orders. 27. The defense requests that all motions which contain non-publicly known factual information either be filed as suppressed motions or be filed as a public pleading with a suppressed supplement setting forth the non-publiely known facts, 128. The defense requests that suppressed motions be kept as non-public pleadings until defense investigations are complete, until after the proof evident presumption great hearing, or until a verdict is reached in the case. CONCLUSION 29. Mr. Morphew has specifically identified more than one substantial interest served by making the court record inaccessible until either proof evident presumption great hearing or until a verdict is reached: 1) the unusual and inflammatory nature of the arrest affidavit; 2) to protect the alleged victims {_ 1S OF 3) to allow the ongoing defense investigation to continue unimpeded; 4) to prevent a potential violation of Colo. R. Prof. Cond. 3.8 (f); and 5) to preserve Mr. Morphew’s Tight to a fair trial by impartial jurors from the surrounding community, 30. Given the nature of the Affidavit, no less restrictive means would achieve or protect any substantial interests identified, 31. The nature and extent of the substantial interests identified override the presumptive Public access to the court record or to an unredacted copy of it, especially if public access is only limited concerning the affidavit and until the proof evident presumption great hearing and defense investigation can be completed. Respecifully Submitted, MEGAN A. RING, COLORADO STATE PUBLIC DEFENDERCertificate of Service: I certify that on May ‘SDanicl Zetter 12, 2021 I served the foregoing document Daniel Zettler (52388)Deputy State Public through the Colorado Courts E-Filing system Defender on all opposing parties of record. 13District Court, Chaffee County, Colorado Court Address: 142 CRESTONE AVE , SALIDA, CO 81201 DATE fILED: May 14, 2021 9:34 AM 719-539-2561 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Plaintiff v BARRY MORPHEW. Defendant + COURT USE ONLY + Case Number: 21CR78 Courtroom DISTRICT Order Regarding Defense Motion To Limit Public Access To Court Records Already Filed ‘The Defendant has filed a Motion to Limit Public Access to a Court Record Already Filed pursuant to C.R.C.P. Rule 55.1(2). That Motion was filed Thursday, May 13, 2021 By Rule, a party in opposition to the Defense's Motion has fourteen days to file a Response to the Motion. C.R.C.P. Rule 55.1(2) Also pursuant to Rule, "upon receiving the Motion, the clerk shall make the subject court record inaccessible to the public pending the court's resolution of the Motion.” C.R.C.P. Rule 55.1(2) The Motion, and any Response, shall also be inaccessible to the public pending the court's resolution of the Motion. The Court makes this decision because the Motion itself contains significant information that the Motion argues should not be accessible to the public. C.R.C.P. Rule 55.1(2) ‘Therefore, it is Ordered that: 1. Any party in opposition to the Motion has until Thursday, May 27, 2021, to file a Response to the Motion. 2. Until the Court resolves the Motion, the arrest affidavit, the Motion and any Response to the Motion are to remain inaccessible to the Public. Dated May 14, 2021 ick Murphy jef Judge. 13D.DISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORADO Court Address: 142 Crestone Ave. Salida, CO 81201 Court Phone: (719) $39-2561 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, v. BARRY LEE MORPHEW, Defendant. Tris Eytan, #29505 Dru Nielsen, #28775 Eytan Nielsen LLC 3200 Cherry Creek South Drive, Suite 720 Denver, CO 80209 Telephone: (720) 440-8155 Facsimile: (720) 440-8156 Email: iris@eytan-nielsen.com dru@eytan-nielsen.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT BARRY LI MORPHEW DATE FILED: May 17, 2021 5:39 PM 4 COURT USE ONLY & Case Number: 21CR78 Courtroom/Division: 2 MOTION FOR PRESERVATION AND PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE [D-13] Mr. Barry Lee Morphew, by and through undersigned counsel, requests the prosecutors and law enforcement agencies involved in the investigation or prosecution of this case preserve and produce the following evidentiary items pursuant to CR.C.P 16, and the legal grounds as stated in the filed Discovery Demand [D-9] incorporated herein: 1. Any recordings of radio, telephone or other communications between law enforcement officers and any other person(s) pertaining to this case. 2. Emails and text messages between law enforcement officers and all individuals (including ining to this case. prosecutors) contacted and per 3. All photographs, video media, surveillance tapes, 911 calls, police dispatch tapes, all police reports, oral and written witness statements, including the statements, opinions, and reports of law enforcement officials, consultants and experts contacted by the prosecution.The defendant objects to the destruction, release, alteration, or testing of any evidence observed, collected or held in connection with this case by the district attorney or law enforcement, or their agents. The defendant objects to the destruction, release, alteration, or deletion of written correspondence between law enforcement officers and all individuals (including prosecutors) pertaining to this case, and between prosecutors and their consultants and experts that pertain to this case. Respectfully submitted this 17th day of May, 2021. EYTAN NIELSEN LLC si Iris Eytan __ Iris Eytan, #29505 s/Dru Nielsen CERTIFICATE OF ERVICE Thereby certify that on this 17th day of May, 2021 a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION FOR PRESERVATION AND PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE [D-13] was served via CCE as follows: Mr. Jeffrey Lindsey 11" Judicial District Attomey’s Office 101 Crestone Ave. Salida, CO 81201 s/ Tonya Holliday Tonya HollidayDISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORADO Court Address: 142 Crestone Ave. Salida, CO 81201 Court Phone: (719) 539-2561 DATE FILED: May 17, 2021 5:39 PM THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, v, BARRY LEE MORPHEW, Defendant. & COURT USE ONLY & Case Number: 21CR78 Tris Eytan, #29505 Dru Nielsen, #28775 Fytan Nielsen LLC 3200 Cherry Creek South Drive, Suite 720 Denver, CO 80209 ‘Telephone: (720) 440-8155 Facsimile: (720) 440-8156 Email: iris@eytan-nielsen.com dru@eytan-nielsen.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT BARRY LEE MORPHEW Courtroom/Division: 2 MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING AND PROOF EVIDENT PRESUMPTION GREAT HEARING [D-12] Mr. Barry Lee Morphew, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby moves for a preliminary hearing pursuant to Rule 5 of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure, and C.R.S. § 16-5-301 and 18-1-404. Further, Mr. Morphew requests a proof evident presumption great hearing pursuant to C.R.S. §16-4-101(1)(a). Respectfully submitted this 17th day of May, 2021, EYTAN NIELSEN LLC ‘/ Iris Eytan Iris Eytan, #29505 s/Dru Nielsen Dru Nielsen, #28775CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Thereby certify that on this 17th day of May, 2021 a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING AND PROOF EVIDENT PRESUMPTION GREAT HEARING [D-12] was served via CCE as follows: Mr. Jeffrey Lindsey 11" Judicial District Attorney’s Office 101 Crestone Ave. Salida, CO 81201 s/ Tonya Holliday Tonya HollidayDISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORADO DATE FILED: May 17, 2021 5:39 PM Court Address: 142 Crestone Ave. Salida, CO 81201 Court Phone: (719) 539-2561 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, ve ‘& COURT USE ONLY & BARRY LEE MORPHEW, Defendant. Case Number: 21CR78 Tris Eytan, #29505 Dru Nielsen, #28775 Eytan Nielsen LLC Courtroom/Division: 2 3200 Cherry Creek South Drive, Suite 720 Denver, CO 80209 Telephone: (720) 440-8155 Facsimile: (720) 440-8156 Email: iris@eytan-nielsen.com dru@eytan-nielsen.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT BARRY LEE MORPHEW NOTICE OF INVOCATION OF ALL STATUTORY AND CONSITITUTIONAL, RIGHTS AND PRIVILESGES AND REVOLCATION OF ANY AND ALL. PREVIOUSLY GIVEN WAIVERS OF PRIVILEGES [D-11] Defendant, Barry Lee Morphew, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby notifies the District Attomey's office and/or all law enforcement agencies of the following: L Invocation of Statutory and Constitutional Privileges 1, First, Defendant invokes the following privileges a. All privileges granted under C.R.S. § 13-90-107; b. All medical and psychiatric (including but not limited to drug and alcohol treatment, mental health treatment, domestic violence and/or anger management treatment) privileges afforded to Defendant under the Colorado and United States Constitutions andCRS. § 13-90-107 as to all medical and/or psychiatric treatment Defendant has ever received; and c. All privileges in school, employment, military, probation, prison, parole, social services, educational, or any other records Defendant has a confidentiality expectation through federal and state statutes and case law, administrative regulations and rules, or federal and state constitutional provisions, or the agencies own statements to Defendant, either oral or written. 2. __ Defendant requests that this Court specifically order that no member of the Office of the District Attorney, law enforcement, or any person or agency specified in Rule 16, Part [,(a)(3) of the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure or their respective agents attempt to obtain confidential information pertaining to Defendant, 3. Defendant does not authorize any person to waive said privileges on Defendant's behalf. 4, Second, Defendant hereby exercises his right to silence, right against self- incrimination, and his right to counsel under the federal and state constitutions. See U.S. Const. amend. V, VI, XIV; Colo. Const. art. Il, § 16, 18, 25; People v. Pierson, 633 P.2d 485 (Colo. App. 1981); People v. Pierson, 670 P.2d 770 (Colo. 1983); People v. Cerezo, 635 P.2d 1197 (Colo. 1981); People v. Lowe, 616 P.2d 118 (Colo. 1980); People v. Jones, 677 P.2d 383 (Colo. App. 1983). See also Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981); Massiah v. United States, 377 USS. 201 (1964); United States v. Henry, 447 U.S. 264 (1980); Maine v. Moulton, 474 US. 159 (1985). 5. The Defendant does not wish to be interviewed, contacted, or questioned unless hi attomey is present. The Defendant wishes all of his contacts with state agents to take place through his legal counsel 6. Defendant further moves this Court to enter a prophylactic order requiring the Offfice of the District Attorney, any other law enforcement persons, and their agents to (a) get the consent of Defendant's counsel before attempting to contact or interview the Defendant and (b) give said counsel reasonable opportunity to be present PRIOR to any contact with the Defendant 7. Notification and consent of opposing counsel is required by the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct, Ruled.2. nL Revocation of Any and All Previously Given Waivers 8. Additionally, counsel for defendant hereby notifies the court and prosecution that defendant as of today's date revokes any and all previously stated or signed purported waivers of| confidentiality and/or privilege including but not limited to medical, psychological, custodial, marital, religious, educational, and/or job-related waivers. Defendant does not consent to release of any records to the prosecution, law enforcement, or any agents acting on behalf of the prosecution or law enforcement. 9. Defendant further revokes any and all previously stated or signed purported waivers of his constitutional right to silence, right against self-inerimination, and right to counsel 2Mr. Morphew files this motion, and makes all other motions and objections in this case, whether or not specifically noted at the time of making the motion or objection, on the following grounds and authorities: the Due Process Clause, the Right to a Fair Trial by an Impartial Jury, the Rights to Counsel, Equal Protection, Confrontation, and Compulsory Process, the Rights to Remain Silent and to Appeal, and the Right to be Free from Cruel and Unusual Punishment, pursuant to the Federal and Colorado Constitutions generally, and specifically, the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitutions, and Article Il, sections 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 16, 18, 20, 23, 25 and 28 of the Colorado Constitution. Respectfully submitted this 17th day of May, 2021. EYTAN NIELSEN LLC Ir mI Iris Eytan, #29505 s/ Dru Nielsen Dru Nielsen, #28775 CERTIF OF SERVIC Thereby certify that on this 17th day of May, 2021, a true and correct copy of the foregoing NOTICE OF INVOCATION OF ALL STATUTORY AND CONSITITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND PRIVILESGES AND REVOLCATION OF ANY AND ALL PREVIOUSLY GIVEN WAIVERS OF PRIVILEGES [D-11] was served via CCE to the following: Mr. Jeffrey Lindsey 11" Judicial District Attorney’s Office. 101 Crestone Ave. Salida, CO 81201 s/Tonya Holliday Tonya HollidayDISTRICT COURT, CHAFFEE COUNTY, COLORADO DATE FILED: May 17, Court Address: 142 Crestone Ave. Salida, CO 81201 Court Phone: (719) 539-2561 ‘THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, 4 COURT USE ONLY & BARRY LEE MORPHEW, Defendant. Case Number: 21CR78 Tris Eytan, #29505 Dru Nielsen, #28775 Courtroom/Division: 2 Eytan Nielsen LLC 3200 Cherry Creek South Drive, Suite 720 Denver, CO 80209 Telephone: (720) 440-8155 Facsimile: (720) 440-8156 Email: iris@eytan-nielsen.com dru@eytan-nietsen.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT BARRY LEE MORPHEW DISCOVERY DEMAND [D-10] The Defendant, Barry Morphew, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby requests and demands that his fundamental right to full discovery is protected pursuant to his statutory and Colorado and Federal constitutional right to a reliable and fair trial. Defendant also files this motion to ensure absolute faimess and integrity prior to and during trial. Whereby, Defendant makes the following specific demands: I. GENERAL DISCOVERY REQUEST 1 Defendant requests this Court to order the discovery, preservation, and immediate production of the following materials: a. Police handwritten or typed or dictated notes and tapes of any and all contacts and statements of all people contacted or interviewed regarding this case, and all policehandwritten or typed or dictated notes and tapes of all police activities and commentary and statements regarding this case. b. The tapes of dictations police investigators dictate from their notes that are or are not transcribed into police reports c. All records, experiments, 911 tapes, dispatch tapes, and all other audiotapes and/or videotapes and/or other media of recordings. 4. Duplicates of all photographs, videotapes and/or audiotapes. 2. These materials should be preserved and made available to defense counsel pursuant to Crim.P. 16(1)(a) and (c) 3 This discovery is required by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments, Art. II, §§ 16 and 25 of the Colorado Constitution; Crim.P. 16, Part I; Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and Wearry v. Cain, 136 S, Ct. 1002 (2016). This information and material is exculpatory, material and relevant. 4. The preservation and production of requested items are material to the preparation of the defense in this case and is reasonable. 5. Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U. . Constitution, nL DISCOVERY DEMAND FOR WITNESS IMPEACHMENT MATERIAL 1 Disclosure of the prior convictions and adjudications of the witnesses the pros: will call. uution 2. Evidence that a prosecution witness has a motive or bias because he or she has entered into an agreement with the prosecution, received leniency from the state, or has outstanding litigation or cases with a prosecutorial agency, including juvenile cases, or parole or probation proceedings. See Davis v, Alaska, 415 U.S. 308 (1974); People v. Bowman, 669 P.2d 1369 (Colo. 1983); People v. Pate, 625 P.2d 369 (Colo. 1981). 3 idence of misdemeanor convictions of a prosecution witness that are probative of untruthfulness or dishonesty. See People v. Armstrong, 704 P.2d 877 (Colo. App. 1985) (cross- examination of witness concerning his prior conviction for the misdemeanor offense of making a false police report is permissible). 4 Any deferred judgment and sentence plea entered into by any witness that is not yet finished at the time the witness has made statements or appeared at a court proceeding. See People v. Vollentine, 643 P.2d 800, 802-803 (Colo. App. 1982). 5 Any grants of immunity to prosecution witnesses. Giglio v. United States, 405 US. 150, 154-55 (1972) (due process is violated where the prosecution fails to disclose the grant of immunity to a prosecution witness).6 Any payments made to a prosecution witness for services to the police or prosecutorial authority, See United States v. Shaffer, 789 F.2d 682, 687-89 (9th Cir. 1986). 1. Any evidence or records that relate to the untruthful reputation of the prosecution witnesses, or evidence of specific instances of untruthfulness of the witness. C.R.E. 608. 8 Information concerning alternative suspects considered by the police or prosecution, See Bowen v. Maynard, 799 F.2d 693, 611 (10th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 962 (1986) (state violated due process by failing to disclose list of other suspects because a released suspect resembled the accused and matched the description of the perpetrator); see also, People v. Flowers, 644 P.2d 916, 918 (Colo. 1982) (an accused may prove his innocence by establishing the guilt of another) 9. Any other evidence relevant to the motive, bias, or interest of the witnesses. See Merritt v. People, 842 P.2d 162, 166 (Colo, 1992) (a defendant is allowed broad cross-examination of the bias and motive of prosecution witnesses); People v. Pate, supra. 10. If the witnesses have waived confidentiality, any and all records and information concerning the prior psychiatric or psychological treatment, evaluation, or hospitalization of all prosecution witnesses since evidence of the mental condition of a witness is admissible as bearing on the credibility of the witness. People v. Schuemann, 190 Colo. 474, 548 P.2d 911, 913 (1976); People v. Vorrelli, 624 P.2d 900, 904 (Colo. App. 1980) u Any and all information concerning drug and alcohol use, prosecution witnesses since the use or abuse of alcohol or drugs could have impaired the prose witness’ ability to perceive or recollect. See People v. Roberts, 37 Colo. App. 490, 553 P.2d 93 (1976). 12, Materials in possession of all law enforcement agencies that have participated in the investigation or provided reports concerning the case which are constructively in the "possession or control” of the prosecuting attorney under Crim. P. 16(I)(a)(1). People v. District Court, 793 P.2d 163 (Colo. 1990) (the prosecuting attomey's obligations extend to material and information in the possession or control of staff or others that have participated in the investigation); Chambers v. People, 682 P.2d 1173, 1180 n.13 (Colo. 1984); Ortega v. People, 162 Colo. 358, 426 P.2d 180 (1967); People v, Lucero, 623 P.2d 424 (Colo. App. 1980); Crim. P. 16(1)(c). The prosecution must make efforts to locate and deliver copies of this material to the defense and "[iJt is incumbent upon the prosecutor to promulgate and enforce rigorous and systematic procedures designed to preserve all discoverable evidence gathered in the course of the criminal investigation." People v. District Court, 623 P.2d 424 (Colo. App. 1980); Crim. P. 16(1)(b)(4). MI. DISCOVERY DEMAND FOR INVESTIGATOR NOTES, 1 ‘The handwritten and/or typewritten notes of investigators and victim witness advocates must be preserved and disclosed to the defense if they contain the substance of recitals of oral statements made by witnesses. See People v. Shaw, 646 P.2d 375, 381 (Colo. 1982); People v. Thatcher, 638 P.2d 760, 767 (Colo. 1981). Although the work product of a prosecuting attomey is not discoverable, see Crim. P. 16(1)(e)(1), non-discoverable material may be excised and the remainder provided to the accused. People v. District Court, 780 P.2d 332, 336 (Colo. 1990).