State v. Cabral, 35,878

Defendant Kevin Cabral was convicted after a bench trial in metropolitan court of DWI, no driver’s license, and driving at night without headlights; the district court affirmed and Cabral appealed to this Court.
This Court issued a calendar notice proposing summary affirmance and invited objections; Cabral filed a memorandum in opposition reiterating five issues.
Key contested facts: admission of breath-test results (breath card), whether the mandatory 20-minute deprivation/observation period before the breath test was satisfied, sufficiency of evidence for the no-license conviction, and whether Cabral’s arrest was supported by probable cause.
Metropolitan court admitted the breath card based on foundation testimony; Officer Trahan testified but did not testify specifically that the gas canister was SLD-approved.
Officer Trahan handcuffed Cabral in the backseat of the patrol vehicle during the 20-minute period; there was no testimony that the vehicle was cleared of consumables.
For the no-license charge, Cabral failed to produce a license at the stop and later in court; he also admitted on video that he did not have a license.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of breath card	State: foundation via officer testimony under rule suffices	Cabral: SLD approval of gas canister must be shown as threshold	Court: No error; Hobbs allows foundation without pre-showing SLD approval; defendant could seek discovery to challenge SLD status
20-minute deprivation/observation period	State: evidence shows deprivation satisfied (officer custody in patrol car)	Cabral: officer failed continuous observation; vehicle not shown cleared of consumables	Court: No abuse of discretion; Willie supports finding deprivation met when restrained such that consumption was unlikely
Sufficiency of evidence — no driver’s license	State: failure to produce license at stop and in court suffices	Cabral: conviction rests solely on his admission; corpus delicti not established	Court: Conviction supported by failure to produce license and statutory rule permitting acquittal if valid license produced in court; corpus delicti satisfied
Probable cause for arrest / sufficiency for DWI	State: probable cause and sufficient evidence were presented to district court	Cabral: challenges rehashed on appeal but did not point to error beyond district court review	Court: Affirmed; appellant did not demonstrate error on probable cause or sufficiency issues

State v. Hobbs, 366 P.3d 304 (N.M. Ct. App. 2016) (State need not make threshold showing that every component of breath-test equipment is SLD-approved to lay foundation for admission)
State v. Willie, 212 P.3d 369 (N.M. 2009) (restraint that makes consumption unlikely can satisfy deprivation/observation requirement)
State v. Paris, 414 P.2d 512 (N.M. 1966) (corpus delicti rule bars conviction based solely on extrajudicial confession unless crime independently established)
State v. Slade, 331 P.3d 930 (N.M. Ct. App. 2014) (appellate courts do not re-weigh evidence or draw inferences for a contrary verdict)
Hennessy v. Duryea, 955 P.2d 683 (N.M. Ct. App. 1998) (in summary calendar cases, burden is on opposing party to clearly point out errors of fact or law)