State v. Jones, 464 P.3d 1079

Officers Hong and Aguilar responded to a domestic disturbance at Jones’s home; while investigating, Jones’s son Corey briefly went inside and then opened the door yelling.
Sergeant Aguilar drew and pointed a TASER at Corey (knowing Corey had an outstanding warrant but not advising him at that moment); Officer Hong also drew his TASER.
Jones believed the officers had guns and stepped between them and her son, grabbing Aguilar’s wrist; Aguilar deployed his TASER and struck Jones instead of Corey.
Jones was charged and convicted of battery upon a peace officer (§ 30-22-24) and resisting or abusing a peace officer (§ 30-22-1(D)); the district court denied her request for a jury instruction on defense of another.
On appeal the Court of Appeals held (for the first time in New Mexico) that defense of another against excessive force by a police officer is a viable defense, applied the standard from State v. Ellis, reversed Jones’s convictions, and remanded for a new trial.
The court also addressed double jeopardy: the State conceded error that, if convictions rest on unitary conduct, the lesser conviction must be vacated on retrial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a defendant may claim defense of another against excessive force by a police officer and was entitled to a jury instruction here	Ellis governs self-defense against police; State contested that the evidence showed excessive force (so no instruction)	Jones argued she acted to defend her son from excessive force and any evidence supporting that entitles her to the instruction	Court held defense of another against excessive police force is a viable defense (apply Ellis); reasonable minds could differ on excessiveness here—jury instruction required; convictions reversed and case remanded for new trial
Whether convictions for battery on a peace officer and resisting/abusing a peace officer violate double jeopardy	State conceded the issue; if both convictions rest on unitary conduct, double jeopardy is violated	Jones argued the two convictions are multiplicitous and violate double jeopardy	Court held convictions based on unitary conduct would violate double jeopardy; remedy is vacatur of the lesser offense on retrial

State v. Ellis, 186 P.3d 245 (N.M. 2008) (sets standard for self-defense against police force; if some evidence of excessive force exists, instruction is required)
State v. Sandoval, 258 P.3d 1016 (N.M. 2011) (treats defense of another and self-defense as analytically similar)
State v. Orosco, 655 P.2d 1024 (N.M. Ct. App. 1982) (recognizes defense of another can defeat resisting/abusing-officer charge arising from same incident)
State v. Ford, 157 P.3d 77 (N.M. Ct. App. 2007) (convictions for battery on officer and resisting/abusing based on unitary conduct violate double jeopardy)
State v. Santillanes, 27 P.3d 456 (N.M. 2001) (remedy for impermissible multiple punishments is vacatur of the lesser offense)