State v. Cotton
150 N.M. 583
| N.M. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Defendant was in the driver's seat of a van parked on the roadside in Hobbs, NM; his girlfriend and four children were in the vehicle.
- Deputies investigated a possible domestic incident; odor of alcohol detected from the van; Defendant admitted consuming beer about one hour earlier.
- Defendant failed field sobriety tests, was arrested for DWI, refused chemical testing, and was uncooperative in the police car.
- He was charged with aggravated DWI under 66-8-102, negligent child abuse not resulting in great bodily harm under 30-6-1, and resisting/evading/obstructing an officer under 30-22-1.
- The State argued Defendant drove prior to contact and was impaired to the slightest degree at that time; the State sought conviction on past impaired driving theory.
- The Court reversed the aggravated DWI and child abuse convictions, affirmed the resisting arrest conviction, and remanded for resentencing on that sole conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for aggravated DWI | State argued Defendant drove before contact and was impaired to the slightest degree. | State failed to prove actual driving or impairment at driving time. | Aggravated DWI reversed; insufficient evidence |
| Sufficiency of evidence for child abuse by endangerment | State relied on risk created by possible future driving with impaired adult in car. | No actual act; possible future conduct cannot support conviction under Chavez. | Child abuse conviction reversed; no substantial and foreseeable risk shown |
| Sufficiency of evidence for resisting arrest | Defendant resisted/abused deputies during detention. | Argues lack of compelling evidence of resistance; reweighing not allowed. | Resisting arrest conviction affirmed; sufficient evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Sims, 148 N.M. 330 (2010-NMSC-027) (new actual physical control standard requiring intent to drive when premised on prospective driving)
- State v. Mailman, 148 N.M. 702 (2010-NMSC-036) (impaired driving theory; past driving supported conviction when appropriately proven)
- State v. Chavez, 146 N.M. 434 (2009-NMSC-035) (child endangerment requires substantial and foreseeable risk; not mere potential danger)
- State v. Graham, 137 N.M. 197 (2005-NMSC-004) (circumstantial evidence; distinguishes left marijuana in home from driving risk)
- State v. Vigil, 147 N.M. 537 (2010-NMSC-003) (jury cannot engage in impermissible speculation to reach conclusions)
- State v. Sanchez, 129 N.M. 284 (2000-NMSC-021) (Double Jeopardy concerns in retrialissa)