State v. Myers
150 N.M. 1
N.M.2011Background
- Defendant Ronald Myers secretly videotaped two minor girls using a bathroom in a government office in 2004; camera hidden under a radiator captured the girls’ pubic area before and after toileting.
- He was convicted on seven counts under the Sexual Exploitation of Children Act for manufacturing obscene visuals involving minors.
- Court of Appeals remanded after remand with questions on vagueness and whether SORNA registration could be stayed pending appeal.
- This Court previously reversed in Myers II, holding the images could be lewd and obscene, and remanded to address the remaining issues; Myers III remanded for reconsideration.
- The Supreme Court now affirms the convictions, rejects a stay of SORNA pending appeal, and clarifies Rendleman/Myers II interpretations without due process violation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Myers II made the Act unconstitutionally vague as applied | State argues Myers II did not create vagueness; it correctly defined lewdness | Myers II was unforeseeable and retroactive, violating due process | No due process violation; Myers II appropriately applied to conduct. |
| Whether applying Myers II to Defendant complies with due process standard | State contends standard is foreseeably applied | Defendant could not have foreseen lewdness under the Act | Two-prong framework affirmed; no due process issue. |
| Whether a district court may stay SORNA registration pending appeal | State allows stay as permissible under court discretion | Stay is allowed under trial court discretion | District courts lack power to stay SORNA registration pending appeal; SORNA is remedial and automatic. |
| Whether Rendleman and Myers II interpretations are coherently reconciled | State argues interpretations align with statute | Potential unforeseeability of interpretation | No due process flaw; clarified that lewdness is objective while purpose of stimulation is subjective. |
| Whether the Court should reverse Myers III and enforce convictions | State seeks affirmance of convictions | Defendant seeks relief from remand rulings | Convinctions affirmed; Myers III reversed and remanded for enforcement. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bouie v. City of Columbia, 378 U.S. 347 (U.S. 1964) (retroactive judicial interpretation must not swallow notice)
- Rendleman, 2003-NMCA-150 (N.M. Ct. App. 2003) (image lewdness; framework for lewd vs not lewd)
- Myers II, 2009-NMSC-016 (N.M. 2009) (lewdness test for child pornography; objective lewdness and subjective purpose for stimulation)
- Myers III, 2010-NMCA-007 (N.M. Ct. App. 2010) (remand; Court of Appeals’ reinterpretation challenged)
- Johnson, 2001-NMSC-001 (N.M. 2001) (Bouie cited as due process example; foreseeability standard)
- Alderette, 111 N.M. 297 (N.M. Ct. App. 1990) (Bouie principle applied to vagueness/due process)