State v. Page
35,624
| N.M. Ct. App. | Apr 18, 2017Background
- Defendant convicted of trafficking methamphetamine by distribution after an undercover informant received meth from him; defendant appealed.
- Defendant challenged sufficiency of the evidence, arguing the informant was not credible and jury should have disbelieved her.
- Defendant asserted evidentiary error: a detective was permitted to give a lay-opinion that the informant appeared under the influence of drugs; defendant argued inadequate foundation.
- Defendant asserted instructional error: the trafficking instruction presented three alternative means of proving intent and allegedly conflicted with a use note, risking juror confusion.
- Court of Appeals issued a proposed summary disposition affirming conviction; defendant filed an opposition but the court remained unpersuaded and affirmed the judgment and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence | State: informant testimony supported conviction | Informant lacked credibility; jury should have disbelieved her | Affirmed — credibility is for jury; record supports verdict |
| Lay-opinion testimony admissibility | State: detective had first-hand observations supporting lay opinion | Detective lacked proper foundation to opine about methamphetamine influence | Affirmed — first-hand observations and rational connection suffice for lay opinion |
| Jury instruction on intent | State: instruction correctly presented alternatives for intent and required actual transfer | Instruction’s alternative phrasing could confuse jurors and conflict with use note | Affirmed — instructions read as whole accurately stated law; any noncompliance with use note not reversible |
| Overall instructional error standard | State: review instructions as whole; accuracy controls | Defendant: potential for jury to convict on mere bad intent without proof of distribution | Affirmed — instruction required proof of actual transfer; any finding necessarily established trafficking by distribution |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Salas, 127 N.M. 686 (1999-NMCA) (credibility determinations are reserved to the trier of fact)
- City of Farmington v. Fawcett, 114 N.M. 537 (1992-NMCA) (lay-opinion admissibility requires first-hand knowledge and rational connection)
- State v. Luna, 92 N.M. 680 (1979-NMCA) (opinions based on ordinary observations about intoxication are within bounds of lay testimony)
- State v. Tafoya, 147 N.M. 602 (2010-NMCA) (review instructions as a whole; accurate presentation of law controls even if use note not strictly followed)