Get above the noise
Log in for answers tailored to you — saved chats, your topics, and the full IJR suite.
On the bench with
State v. Marquez
New Mexico Supreme Court · 2023-10-12 · cited 8×
The case involved charges of first-degree criminal sexual penetration of a minor against defendant Isaac Marquez, based on allegations that he digitally penetrated his wife's granddaughter when she was between ages six and eight. At trial, the district court admitted evidence of other uncharged sexual misconduct by the defendant against the same victim under the common-law lewd and lascivious disposition exception to Rule 11-404(B)(1)'s bar on propensity evidence. The New Mexico Supreme Court held that this exception has been abrogated and that evidence offered to show a lewd disposition toward the alleged victim is inadmissible propensity evidence unless it qualifies for a nonpropensity purpose under Rule 11-404(B)(2). The court therefore vacated the convictions and remanded for a new trial, with instructions that any prior-acts evidence must first be found admissible under the rule's nonpropensity exceptions and Rule 11-403.
criminal lawprocedure
State v. Arrendondo
New Mexico Supreme Court · 2012-05-07 · cited 182×
In State v. Arrendondo, the defendant was tried and convicted of first-degree murder, assault with intent to commit a violent felony, negligent child abuse, tampering with evidence, and shooting at a dwelling after he shot and killed the victim, claiming self-defense while witnesses testified the victim was unarmed. On appeal, the New Mexico Supreme Court reviewed claims regarding the denial of a fifth continuance to test jacket evidence, sufficiency of the evidence for several convictions, ineffective assistance of counsel, and an unpreserved speedy trial argument. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the continuance due to prior delays and lack of relevance shown, that sufficient evidence supported the murder, shooting, and some other convictions but not the child abuse or tampering counts, and that the assault conviction lacked proper jury instructions on the underlying felony. It therefore affirmed the murder and remaining convictions, reversed the child abuse and tampering convictions for insufficient evidence, reversed the assault conviction for remand on a new trial, and found no fundamental error on the speedy trial issue.
criminal lawprocedure
Estate of Gutierrez Ex Rel. Jaramillo v. Meteor Monument
New Mexico Supreme Court · 2012-02-22 · cited 24×
The case involved the estate and family of Daniel Gutierrez suing Meteor Monument after its employee Dean Durand caused Gutierrez's death in a drunk-driving accident; the claims included liability under New Mexico's Dram Shop Act for serving alcohol to an intoxicated person and negligent supervision of Durand as an alcoholic employee. The trial court entered verdicts for the plaintiffs on both claims, but the Court of Appeals reversed the dram shop verdict for insufficient evidence and ordered a new trial on negligent supervision due to confusing jury instructions on scope of employment. The New Mexico Supreme Court reversed, holding that circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support the dram shop verdict without identifying the specific server and that Meteor could not obtain a new trial because it had invited the jury-instruction error in the face of established case law on negligent supervision.
torts & liabilitylabor & employmentbusiness & regulatory
Maestas v. Hall
New Mexico Supreme Court · 2012-02-21 · cited 10×
This case concerns challenges to New Mexico's state legislative redistricting plans following the 2010 census, consolidated before the district court on remand from the New Mexico Supreme Court. The core dispute involved whether the plans complied with the federal Voting Rights Act's Section 2 requirements for creating or maintaining effective Hispanic majority-minority districts, particularly District 63 in the Clovis area. On remand, the district court interpreted the Supreme Court's directive to place the burden on parties seeking to alter such districts and concluded that the record did not support findings that Voting Rights Act protections were no longer needed. The court therefore adopted a final plan that preserved District 63's boundaries as closely as possible to the existing configuration, resulting in a 57% Hispanic voting-age population in that district while adjusting neighboring District 67.
electionscivil rights
State v. Harper
New Mexico Supreme Court · 2011-11-22 · cited 116×
In this criminal case, defendant Curtis Harper faced fifteen counts of criminal sexual penetration of a child under thirteen. The district court set a deadline for the State to make the victim and examining doctor available for interviews and later excluded both witnesses after the deadline passed, prompting the State to concede it could not proceed to trial. The Court of Appeals reversed the exclusion of the victim but upheld it for the doctor. The New Mexico Supreme Court reversed the district court in full, holding that witness exclusion requires an intentional violation of a court order, prejudice to the opposing party, and consideration of lesser sanctions; here, the record showed no prejudice to Harper, no intentional refusal by the State (particularly regarding payment issues for the doctor), and no exploration of alternative remedies.
criminal lawprocedure
City of Rio Rancho v. AMREP SOUTHWEST INC.
New Mexico Supreme Court · 2011-08-22 · cited 49×
The case concerned a dispute over a ten-acre parcel in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, that the City had obtained a recorded drainage easement over in 1985 when a subdivision plat was filed; later owners Cloudview Estates sought to subdivide the land and vacate the easement, but the City refused, asserting it held fee title or an unrecorded perpetual open-space interest. The New Mexico Supreme Court held that Cloudview was a good-faith purchaser whose ownership was subject only to the recorded drainage easement, because the plat did not dedicate the parcel for public use under NMSA 1978, Section 3-20-11, the City lacked color of title for adverse possession, and the recorded easement extinguished any unrecorded claims. The Court also ruled that the City's denial of the vacation request was arbitrary because it relied on the unrecorded interest, but it remanded the subdivision application to the City and stayed Cloudview's inverse-condemnation claim as premature. Finally, the Court found genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment on the City's unjust-enrichment claim against the original subdivider Amrep.
propertyprocedure