314 P.3d 236
N.M.2013Background
- Lopez was arrested after a traffic stop; officers found a bag with a green leafy substance and a bag with a white powder; he was charged with possession with intent to distribute, possession of marijuana, and driving with a suspended license.
- At the magistrate court preliminary examination, the court admitted a written forensic laboratory report identifying the white powder as cocaine and the leafy substance as marijuana over Lopez’s Confrontation Clause objections; two officers also testified with opinions identifying the substances.
- The magistrate found probable cause and bound Lopez over to district court; Lopez moved in district court to dismiss or remand, arguing admission of the lab report without the analyst’s personal cross-examination violated his Sixth Amendment and Article II, §14 confrontation rights.
- The district court denied the motion; Lopez pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute while reserving his right to appeal the denial; the Court of Appeals certified the appeal to the New Mexico Supreme Court.
- The sole legal question accepted was whether the constitutional right of personal confrontation under Article II, §14 of the New Mexico Constitution applies at a preliminary-examination probable cause determination.
- The Supreme Court held that the state confrontation right is a trial right and does not apply to preliminary probable-cause hearings, and overruled Mascarenas to the extent it held otherwise; Lopez’s conviction and sentence were affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the New Mexico Constitution’s right to confrontation require personal cross-examination at a preliminary-examination probable-cause hearing? | State: No; confrontation is a trial right and does not apply at preliminary probable-cause hearings. | Lopez: Yes; Article II, §14 requires personal confrontation at a preliminary examination and admission of the lab report without the analyst violated that right, depriving district court jurisdiction. | Held: No. Article II, §14 guarantees confrontation as a trial right only. Personal confrontation is not required at preliminary probable-cause determinations; Mascarenas is overruled to the extent it held otherwise. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mascarenas v. State, 80 N.M. 537 (1969) (previous New Mexico precedent holding confrontation applies at preliminary examinations; overruled here)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) (Confrontation Clause restricts admission of testimonial hearsay at trial absent prior cross-examination)
- Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 131 S. Ct. 2705 (2011) (introducing a forensic report at trial without producing the analyst violates the Confrontation Clause)
- Pointer v. Texas, 380 U.S. 400 (1965) (Sixth Amendment confrontation right made applicable to the states)
- Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103 (1975) (Fourth Amendment requires judicial determination of probable cause for extended post-arrest restraint; trial formalities are not required for probable-cause determinations)