2013 NMCA 052
N.M. Ct. App.2013Background
- Defendant Maples drove a friend and Victim to Hobbs; Victim later died after a violent struggle with Maples while Victim was under methamphetamine influence.
- Victim displayed erratic behavior and had been using methamphetamine; she wielded knives during the incident.
- Maples restrained Victim with duct tape and twine; Victim stopped breathing while still restrained; CPR was performed but Victim died.
- Police investigation followed, and Maples and Kaci Easter were charged with Victim's death.
- Before trial, Maples sought to admit officers’ testimony about Victim’s prior acts while methamphetamine-impaired; the State moved to exclude as Rule 11-404(A) character evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of Victim’s prior acts under Rule 11-404(B) for corroboration | Officers’ testimony is not character evidence and may be probative for corroborating defendant’s account. | Prior acts evidence is admissible to show Victim’s behavior under methamphetamine and corroborate fear/need for force. | Abuse of discretion; admissible under Rule 11-404(B) for corroboration |
| Right to present complete defense affected by exclusion | Exclusion did not prejudice the State; evidence was properly excluded as character evidence. | Exclusion deprived Maples of a complete defense and prevented relevant corroboration of his account. | Reversed and remanded for new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Armendariz, 140 N.M. 182 (2006) (limits on admission of specific acts in self-defense)
- State v. Baca, 114 N.M. 668 (1992) (methods of proving victim’s character; exceptions to 404(A))
- State v. Lamure, 115 N.M. 61 (Ct. App. 1992) (distinguishes general propensity vs. specific acts evidence)
- State v. Swavola, 114 N.M. 472 (Ct. App. 1992) (exemplifies non-propensity use of prior acts evidence)
- State v. Dancan, 111 N.M. 354 (1991) (relationship between Rule 11-405 and 11-404 specificity)
- State v. Fish, 213 P.3d 258 (2009) (use of prior acts to corroborate defense in context of self-defense)
- State v. Gallegos, 2007-NMSC-007 (2007) (proper purposes for Rule 11-404(B) evidence; balancing with 11-403)
- State v. Gutierrez, 2011-NMCA-088 (2011) (legitimate purposes for 11-404(B) evidence; sufficiency of purpose)
- State v. Ruiz, 119 N.M. 515 (Ct. App. 1995) ( prejudice vs. legitimate purpose in 404(B) evidence)
- State v. Salgado, 112 N.M. 793 (Ct. App. 1991) (exclusion of defense evidence in self-defense context)