State v. Sanchez, A-1-CA-36383

Defendant (Leonard Sanchez) was convicted after a bench trial in metropolitan court of DWI (impaired to the slightest degree) and speeding.
Defendant appealed to the district court, which affirmed the metropolitan court’s convictions, finding sufficient evidence for DWI (impaired to the slightest degree) and declining to decide the per se DWI contention.
Defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals; the panel issued a notice of proposed disposition proposing to affirm the district court.
Defendant filed a memorandum in opposition arguing insufficiency of the evidence but did not identify specific factual or legal errors in the court’s analyses.
The Court of Appeals adopted the district court’s reasoning, concluded Defendant failed to meet his burden to show error, and affirmed the convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for DWI (impaired to the slightest degree)	State argues evidence supported impairment finding	Sanchez argues evidence was insufficient to prove impairment beyond a reasonable doubt	Affirmed — evidence sufficient; conviction upheld
Sufficiency of evidence for DWI (per se)	State maintains per se basis could support DWI	Sanchez argues per se evidence insufficient	Not decided — district court found impaired DWI sufficient and appellate court adopted that disposition, so per se issue was not resolved

Hennessy v. Duryea, 955 P.2d 683 (N.M. Ct. App. 1998) (in summary calendar cases, opponent must clearly point out errors in proposed disposition)
State v. Aragon, 981 P.2d 1211 (N.M. Ct. App. 1999) (trial-court rulings carry a presumption of correctness; appellant bears burden to show error)