State v. Gomez
1 N.M. Ct. App. 58
N.M. Ct. App.2011Background
- Gomez pled guilty in three consolidated cases resolving six charges across 2007–2008 under three plea agreements.
- Each agreement capped the total time to 0–9 years of incarceration, probation, or treatment, to be served concurrently across the cases.
- Judges Brown, Sheppard, and Butkus orally approved the agreements and prepared to sentence Gomez under them.
- During sentencing, Gomez was deferred and placed in a drug court program, with the court stating any balance would be suspended upon successful completion.
- In May 2009, Judge Brown sentenced Gomez to 21 years with 16 years suspended (5 years actual imprisonment) and 5 years of probation, contrary to the nine-year cap, leading to a motion to modify.
- The trial judge later refused to modify the sentence, interpreting the agreements to allow a five-year prison term plus five years’ probation within the nine-year cap.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sentence violated the nine-year cap in the plea agreements. | Gomez | Gomez argues the cap is nine years total; the actual sentence exceeds it. | Yes; the court's total imprisonment term exceeded nine years. |
| Whether a suspended sentence could justify a longer-term imprisonment than nine years. | Gomez | Suspending execution can allow a longer potential term. | No; the agreements set a total cap of nine years even with suspensions. |
| What is the proper remedy when the district court misconstrues a plea agreement? | Gomez seeks enforcement of the written agreement. | State contends reform and possible withdrawal of plea. | Enforce the agreement as written and remand for a conforming judgment. |
| Whether the plea agreements were properly approved and enforceable despite the district court's misunderstanding. | Gomez | State relied on court approvals to enforce. | Yes; the agreements were approved and enforceable despite misunderstanding. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mares, 119 N.M. 48, 888 P.2d 930 (1994) (construction of plea agreements; enforce maximum incarceration provision when agreed)
- Pieri, 2009-NMSC-019 (2009) (specific performance or withdrawal when plea carries guaranteed sentence)
- Sisneros, 98 N.M. 279, 648 P.2d 318 (1981) (enforcement of plea agreement terms; due process)
- Elmore v. Commonwealth, 236 S.W.3d 623 (2007) (remedy when district court misconstrues plea agreement; enforce or withdraw)
- State v. Reaves, 2008 SD 105, 757 N.W.2d 580 (2008) (district court misconstruction; enforce agreement on remand)