State v. Largo, 1 N.M. Ct. App. 698

Largo and Victim Freida Smith had a 20-year on‑again/off‑again relationship and two children.
On May 20, 2008, Largo, intoxicated, confronted Victim at her trailer seeking reconciliation; she refused.
An altercation occurred outside; Largo shot Victim, who died about six hours later.
Neighbor Stevic Jim witnessed the incident and relayed to 911 that Largo shot Victim.
Deputy Ed Marble arrived; Victim identified Largo as her shooter and said he was headed to the school to shoot children; Thoreau High School was locked down.
Trial court admitted portions of the 911 tape and Deputy Marble’s testimony identifying Largo; fear-for-children material was excluded.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Victim’s statements identifying Largo were testimonial	L Victim’s statements addressed an ongoing emergency	L Victim’s statements were testimonial	Nontestimonial; no Confrontation Clause violation
Whether Victim’s statements fit the dying declaration exception	L dying declaration; admissible under 11-804(B)(2)	L not dying declaration applicable	Admissible as dying declaration
Whether the evidence supports deliberate first‑degree murder	Sufficient circumstantial/direct evidence shows premeditation	Evidence insufficient for deliberate premeditation	Sufficient evidence supports deliberate first‑degree murder

Michigan v. Bryant, 131 S. Ct. 1143 (2011) (contextual test for ongoing emergency; primary purpose of interrogation)
Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (2006) (testimonial vs. nontestimonial under ongoing emergency framework)
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) (foundation of Confrontation Clause and testimonial statements)
State v. Zamarripa, 145 N.M. 402, 199 P.3d 846 (2009) (Confrontation Clause applicability in New Mexico context)
State v. Quintana, 98 N.M. 17, 644 P.2d 531 (1982) (dying declaration admissibility standard for impending death)