State v. Gutierrez
35,092
| N.M. Ct. App. | Aug 3, 2017Background
- Defendant was convicted by a jury of aggravated DWI (based on impairment to the slightest degree plus refusal of chemical testing) and failure to maintain a single traffic lane.
- The docketing statement summarized evidence: lane deviation, odor of alcohol, poor performance on field sobriety tests, and refusal of a breath test.
- Defendant appealed, challenging sufficiency of the evidence for both convictions.
- This Court issued a proposed summary disposition to affirm, finding the docketing-statement facts sufficient when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict.
- Defendant filed a memorandum in opposition; trial counsel did not provide further factual detail and requested assignment to the general calendar for fuller factual development.
- The Court declined further development and affirmed, reasoning the summarized evidence adequately established the statutory elements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for failure to maintain single traffic lane | State: Docketing-statement facts (lane deviation) suffice to meet element | Defendant: Challenges sufficiency (no specific gap identified) | Affirmed — evidence described supports conviction |
| Sufficiency of evidence for aggravated DWI based on impairment to slightest degree | State: Odor of alcohol and poor FST performance support impairment finding | Defendant: Contends evidence insufficient (no specifics offered) | Affirmed — odor and FST clues sufficient when viewed favorably to verdict |
| Sufficiency of evidence for aggravated DWI based on refusal of chemical test | State: Refusal supports aggravated DWI element | Defendant: Disputes sufficiency (no elaboration) | Affirmed — refusal, together with other evidence, supports conviction |
| Appropriateness of summary disposition vs. general-calendar assignment | State: Proposed summary affirmance appropriate given docketing statement facts | Defendant: Requests fuller factual development on general calendar | Affirmed — no basis to expand record; summary disposition proper |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Franklin, 428 P.2d 982 (N.M. 1967) (procedure for appeals under Franklin)
- State v. Boyer, 712 P.2d 1 (N.M. Ct. App. 1985) (appellate briefing and summary disposition practice)
- State v. Neal, 176 P.3d 330 (N.M. Ct. App. 2008) (holding similar facts—lane deviation, odor, bloodshot eyes, poor FSTs, and refusal—sufficient for DWI)