State v. Diaz
35,563
| N.M. Ct. App. | Feb 27, 2017Background
- Diaz was convicted in Bernalillo County of careless driving after rear-ending another vehicle.
- State sought to introduce Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) data through amended testimony from accident-reconstruction deputies.
- During trial the State amended its witness list to add Stan Lundy as a CDR expert eight days before trial resumed following a mid-trial continuance.
- Defendant objected, arguing violation of timely-disclosure rules and that mid-trial amendment was an abuse of discretion.
- Court held the State’s mid-trial amendment and the 30-day continuance were not abuses of discretion, and affirmed the conviction, addressing the CDR testimony, the expert qualification, and judicial-notice issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the mid-trial amendment of the witness list was an abuse of discretion | Diaz (State) allowed amendment; no prejudice shown | Diaz; violation of disclosure rules, time to prepare | No abuse of discretion |
| Whether the 30-day continuance was an abuse of discretion | Continuance necessary to obtain expert; not prejudicial | Continuance length and fault in causing delay | Not an abuse of discretion |
| Whether Lundy was properly qualified as an expert on CDR data | Lundy’s course sufficed; proper qualification | Lundy lacked engineering or advanced scientific credentials | No abuse of discretion in qualification |
| Whether sufficient evidence placed the accident in Bernalillo County or judicial notice sufficed | Evidence or judicial notice established location | Challenge to location-specific evidence | Sufficient evidence, or proper judicial notice, to conclude Bernalillo County; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Griffin, 108 N.M. 55 (1988-NMCA-101) (abuse-of-discretion standard for late-disclosed testimony or witnesses)
- State v. Harper, 150 N.M. 745 (2011-NMSC-044) (sanctions for discovery violations require prejudice; late disclosure alone not enough)
- State v. Salazar, 141 N.M. 148 (2007-NMSC-004) (continuances to cure disclosure issues lie within trial court discretion)
- State v. McDonald, 126 N.M. 44 (1998-NMSC-034) (trial court wide discretion to determine expert qualifications)
- State v. Fuentes, 147 N.M. 761 (2010-NMCA-027) (reliability proceedings may be avoided where reliability is assumed)