State v. Sutton, 36,106

Defendant was stopped by an officer after the officer observed the vehicle slow but fail to stop at a stop sign at Oak Street and a freeway off-ramp.
Officer testified to observing the failure to stop; the trial court credited that testimony.
Defendant was convicted of aggravated DWI and failing to stop at a stop sign; he appealed.
On appeal, Defendant challenged the stop as lacking reasonable suspicion and as pretextual in his docketing statement, but his memorandum in opposition focused primarily on mistake-of-law issues under the New Mexico Constitution.
The Court of Appeals issued a proposed summary disposition upholding the convictions; after Defendant’s memorandum in opposition, the court remained unpersuaded and affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of traffic stop	State: officer observed traffic violation (failure to stop) supporting stop	Sutton: contended stop lacked reasonable suspicion and was pretextual; also raised mistake-of-law claims	Affirmed: objective observation of failure to stop justified the stop; mistake of law not implicated

State v. Vandenberg, 134 N.M. 566, 81 P.3d 19 (N.M. 2003) (traffic-violation suspicion justifies a stop)
State v. Martinez, 348 P.3d 1022 (N.M. Ct. App. 2015) (stop invalid where officer not credible and video contradicted alleged violation)
State v. Gonzales, 150 N.M. 74, 257 P.3d 894 (N.M. 2011) (court assesses whether objective evidence supports real reason for a stop under state constitution)
State v. Hubble, 146 N.M. 70, 206 P.3d 579 (N.M. 2009) (defines mistake of law as error about legal effect of known facts)
State v. Johnson, 107 N.M. 356, 758 P.2d 306 (N.M. Ct. App. 1988) (issues not renewed in response brief are deemed abandoned)