State v. Ochoa
35,924
| N.M. Ct. App. | Apr 19, 2017Background
- Defendant Frances G. Ochoa was convicted by a jury of shoplifting (property over $500) and conspiracy to shoplift.
- Evidence included witness testimony and store video showing Defendant and a man using a self-checkout together.
- Video showed Defendant placing items into a bag without scanning them; an expensive baby monitor was among unscanned items.
- Defendant admitted a plan to take some items but denied intent to steal the baby monitor.
- The State argued the conduct supported both theft and a conspiratorial agreement to avoid scanning/paying for items.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence and affirmed the convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency to convict of shoplifting (> $500) | Evidence (video, witness) shows items > $500 taken without intent to pay | Denied intent to take the baby monitor; challenged sufficiency | Affirmed; rational jury could infer intent to steal the monitor |
| Sufficiency to convict of conspiracy to shoplift (> $500) | Joint conduct at self-checkout permits inference of agreement to steal | Denied agreement; no sufficient proof of conspiracy | Affirmed; jury could infer clandestine agreement from conduct |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Apodaca, 887 P.2d 756 (N.M. 1994) (standard for sufficiency review: view evidence in light most favorable to verdict and ask whether any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- State v. Sutphin, 753 P.2d 1314 (N.M. 1988) (fact-finder may reject defendant’s version of events)
- State v. Gallegos, 254 P.3d 655 (N.M. 2011) (conspiracy is clandestine; agreement may be inferred from conduct and surrounding circumstances)