State v. Catt, 435 P.3d 1255

Angela Catt was indicted with multiple counts related to methamphetamine trafficking (three trafficking counts, three related conspiracy counts) plus racketeering and conspiracy to racketeer tied to involvement with an organization called the “AZ Boys.”
After a four-day jury trial, Catt was convicted of racketeering (Count 1), conspiracy to commit racketeering (Count 2), and conspiracy to traffic methamphetamine on April 8, 2012 (Count 8); she was acquitted on two trafficking-related counts and the jury deadlocked on two others (mistrial ordered on those counts).
Catt moved to set aside the racketeering convictions and to obtain judgments of acquittal or dismissal, arguing the jury failed to find two predicate acts and that jury instructions were legally defective; she also argued retrial would violate double jeopardy.
The State agreed the racketeering instructions were flawed; the district court vacated the racketeering convictions for instructional error but denied acquittal/dismissal and ordered retrial on the racketeering counts; it entered judgment and sentenced Catt on the April 8 conspiracy conviction.
On appeal, the court considered (1) jurisdiction to hear immediate appeals given double jeopardy concerns and finality of the sentencing on Count 8, (2) whether instructional error required vacatur, (3) whether retrial is barred by double jeopardy given acquittals, and (4) sufficiency of the evidence for the conspiracy conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jurisdiction to review denial of dismissal/acquittal	State argued appeal is premature/nonfinal	Catt argued appeal is immediately reviewable because retrial would violate double jeopardy	Court has jurisdiction to review because double jeopardy claim cannot be remedied after retrial
Validity of racketeering and predicate-instruction	State conceded instruction error for racketeering; sought retrial	Catt argued instructional error + inconsistent verdicts meant acquittal/dismissal or retrial barred	Jury instructions were erroneous for failing to give elements of predicate offenses; vacatur of racketeering and conspiracy-to-racketeer convictions was correct
Whether retrial is barred by double jeopardy because of acquittals on some predicate acts	State argued retrial proper; conspiracy predicates can be used	Catt argued only trafficking (not trafficking conspiracy) can be predicates and acquittals on trafficking preclude proving two predicates	Retrial permitted: conspiracy to commit trafficking qualifies as a racketeering predicate; vacatur for trial error does not bar retrial absent insufficiency ruling
Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy to traffic (Count 8)	State relied on informant testimony and circumstantial evidence to prove agreement, intent, and absence of duress	Catt argued evidence insufficient and asserted duress	Substantial evidence supported the conspiracy conviction; jury reasonably found agreement, intent, and no duress

State v. Apodaca, 123 N.M. 372, 940 P.2d 478 (N.M. Ct. App. 1997) (double jeopardy appellate jurisdiction for pretrial order denying dismissal)
State v. Lizzol, 141 N.M. 705, 160 P.3d 886 (N.M. 2007) (vacatur for trial error permits retrial; insufficiency-based vacatur bars retrial)
Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52 (1997) (conspiracy to violate RICO does not require defendant personally agreed to or committed two predicate acts; knowing facilitation suffices)
United States v. Weisman, 624 F.2d 1118 (2d Cir.) (RICO predicate language broad enough to include conspiracies)
United States v. Gotti, 451 F.3d 133 (2d Cir.) (lack of unanimity on particular predicate acts yields hung jury, not acquittal)
State v. Clifford, 117 N.M. 508, 873 P.2d 254 (N.M. 1994) (racketeering requires at least two predicate offenses and jury must be instructed on essential elements)