State v. Cofer
150 N.M. 483
N.M. Ct. App.2011Background
- Defendant Bryan Cofer shoplifted a 32" Sanyo LCD HDTV from Wal-Mart Artesia on June 22, 2008.
- An Artesia police pursuit led to Cofer’s vehicle, where the officer observed the same television in plain view.
- Cofer admitted, after Miranda, that he stole the television from Wal-Mart.
- He was charged with shoplifting merchandise valued over $500, a fourth-degree felony under § 30-16-20(B)(3).
- At trial, the State’s sole witness, Moeller, testified the in-store price was $576 based on Wal-Mart’s intranet records.
- The district court admitted Moeller’s price testimony, finding it could establish value under a business records theory, and Cofer was convicted; the conviction was later reversed on hearsay grounds, with retrial permitted due to sufficient evidence of market value.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of price testimony as hearsay | State argued price exception applies; Martinez supports admissibility. | Moeller's price testimony was inadmissible hearsay; no admitted records foundation. | Hearsay error; price testimony excluded; reversal for that issue. |
| Sufficiency of evidence that market value > $500 | State presented substantial evidence of market value over $500. | Insufficient evidence to prove market value exceeded $500. | Substantial evidence supports value > $500; retrial allowed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Branch, 148 N.M. 601 (2010-NMSC-042) (evidence admission is reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- State v. Moreland, 185 P.3d 363 (2008-NMSC-031) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- City of Albuquerque v. Martinez, 604 P.2d 842 (Ct.App.1979) (price-based testimony on damage/value construed under hearsay rules)
- State v. Pacheco, 193 P.3d 587 (2008-NMCA-131) (business records foundation requirement for admissibility)