State v. Trujillo, 2012 NMCA 112

At about 2:30 a.m. on November 6, 2008, Trujillo and another man broke into Joaquin Lujan’s home armed with metal bars or wooden bats and wearing motorcycle gear.
Victim fought back, and during the struggle Trujillo restrained him and called to the co-actor for help, allowing the other assailant to continue beating the victim.
The assault lasted approximately two to four minutes, occurring largely in Victim’s residence, with the fight focused on overpowering Victim.
Trujillo was convicted of aggravated burglary, aggravated battery, conspiracy to commit aggravated burglary, conspiracy to commit aggravated battery, kidnapping, and false imprisonment, while acquitting him of child abuse, interference with communications, and criminal damage to property.
On appeal, the court reversed the kidnapping conviction as not contemplated by statute for restraint incidental to battery, and remanded to vacate the lesser conspiracy while affirming other convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether restraint incidental to another crime can be kidnapping.	State contends kidnapping covers incidental restraints.	Trujillo argues kidnapping does not cover incidental restraint in this context.	Kidnapping not applicable; restraint incidental to another crime cannot support kidnapping.
Whether conspiracy to commit aggravated burglary and conspiracy to commit aggravated battery violate double jeopardy.	State contends separate conspiracies justify multiple punishments.	Conspiracies are overlapping and part of a single overarching plan.	Remand to vacate the lesser conspiracy conviction.
Whether defense counsel was ineffective for failing to subpoena crucial witnesses.	Defense claims ineffective assistance due to missing witnesses.		No reversible ineffective assistance based on record; decision upheld.
Whether exclusion of officer testimony and drug-use questioning was reversible error.	State argues exclusion was harmless; probative value outweighed prejudice.	Evidence would have undermined Victim’s credibility and defense claims.	Exclusion deemed harmless error; convictions not affected.

State v. Vernon, 116 N.M. 737, 867 P.2d 407 (1993) (held that incidental restraint in murder cases may not constitute kidnapping under old statute)
State v. Crain, 1997-NMCA-101, 124 N.M. 84, 946 P.2d 1095 (1997) (discussed force in CSP vs. kidnapping; double jeopardy analysis limited to predicate offenses)
State v. Pisio, 119 N.M. 252, 889 P.2d 860 (Ct. App. 1994) (held that force beyond CSP can special-case kidnapping; analysis of restraint element)
State v. McGuire, 110 N.M. 304, 795 P.2d 996 (1990) (recognized independent bases for kidnapping and CSP; double jeopardy considerations)
State v. Corneau, 109 N.M. 81, 781 P.2d 1159 (Ct. App. 1989) (addressed whether false imprisonment and CSP III could co-exist without double jeopardy)