State v. Slade, 2014 NMCA 088

Defendant Cameron Slade was convicted of attempted first degree murder for shooting Brian Alexander at a Hobbs, New Mexico party; the State’s evidence was challenged as insufficient to show willful, deliberate, and premeditated intent to kill.
Alexander suffered multiple gunshot wounds; a fight occurred near the hall entrance with multiple witnesses involved or nearby.
Defendant arrived at the hall carrying a .38 revolver borrowed from Royal; Royal carried Defendant’s .40 caliber pistol and fired during the ensuing chaos.
After the shooting began, Defendant fled with Royal, later hid the .40 pistol, and gave inconsistent statements to police and Thomas about his involvement.
The State’s physical evidence included casings and bullets from multiple guns; the defense challenged whether the State proved deliberation and whether double jeopardy bars retrial for a lesser included offense.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Deliberate intent sufficiency for first degree murder	State contends deliberate intent can be inferred from motive, arrival with a weapon, conduct after shooting, and shots fired.	Slade argues there is no evidence of deliberate intent; the State’s inferences amount to guesswork.	Evidence insufficient to prove deliberate intent beyond a reasonable doubt
Post-incident conduct and statements as proof of deliberation	State argues flight, concealment, and statements show consciousness of guilt and possible deliberation.	Post-incident conduct cannot establish pre-shooting state of mind; evidence lacks deliberation.	Post-incident conduct did not establish pre-shooting deliberate intent
Double jeopardy and remedy for insufficient evidence	State seeks retrial for attempted second degree murder upon remand or new trial.	Lower offense should be retried; but conviction for greater offense cannot stand if greater offense was unsupported.	Retrial for attempted second degree murder barred; direct remand inappropriate; conviction reversed and sentence vacated

State v. Dowling, 2011-NMSC-016 (N.M. 2011) (sufficiency review standard granting deference to jury findings)
State v. Graham, 2005-NMSC-004 (N.M. 2005) (standard for weighing evidence and permissible inferences)
State v. McGhee, 1985-NMSC-047 (N.M. 1985) (weight of evidence and inference assessment reserved for jury)
State v. Vigil, 2010-NMSC-003 (N.M. 2010) (importance of linking inferences to established facts; avoid guesswork)
State v. Tafoya, 2012-NMSC-030 (N.M. 2012) (deliberation may occur in short time with corroborating evidence; distinguishes between deliberation and impulsivity)
State v. Adonis, 2008-NMSC-059 (N.M. 2008) (burden to show actual deliberation beyond timing evidence; corroborative factors needed)
State v. Flores, 2010-NMSC-002 (N.M. 2010) (totality of evidence governs deliberate intent analysis)
State v. Duran, 2006-NMSC-035 (N.M. 2006) (deliberate intent can be inferred from content of post-offense statements when paired with attitude evidence)
State v. Sosa, 2000-NMSC-036 (N.M. 2000) (multiple factor consideration for deliberate intent)
Coffin v. Coffin, 1999-NMSC-038 (N.M. 1999) (motive and relationship evidence considered with other circumstances)
State v. Rojo, 1999-NMSC-001 (N.M. 1999) (omnibus analysis of motive and deliberation for first-degree murder)