State v. Valino
2012 NMCA 105
N.M. Ct. App.2012Background
- Castillo, Chief Judge, reverses a battery-on-health-care-worker conviction because the jury instruction lacked the knowledge element.
- Defendant was intoxicated and restrained by security guards at San Juan Regional Medical Center while awaiting pickup by his parents.
- Guards restrained Defendant when he attempted to leave; Defendant punched one guard during the restraint.
- District court denied pretrial motions including whether the guard was a health care worker and whether the DRA barred prosecution.
- Trial occurred; jury convicted Defendant of battery on a health care worker, prompting appellate review.
- Court ultimately reverses for a new trial on the knowledge element, while affirming other issues and leaving some arguments for retrial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the DRA preclude prosecution here? | Tsosie is controlling; DRA does not shield intoxicated defendants from battery charges. | DRA policy protects intoxicated persons from criminal prosecution in this context. | DRA does not bar prosecution |
| Is O’Brien a health care worker under the statute? | O’Brien is an employee of the health care facility and thus a health care worker. | O’Brien’s security role and non-medical duties exclude him from the category. | O’Brien is a health care worker |
| Must knowledge of the victim’s status be an element for battery on a health care worker? | Knowledge should be an essential element akin to Nozie for peace officers. | Knowledge may not be required; statute does not expressly include it. | Knowledge is an essential element; fundamental error to omit |
| Was there substantial evidence that O’Brien acted lawfully? | Evidence showed O’Brien restrained Defendant as directed and inside his duties. | Not enough evidence of lawful performance of duties. | There was substantial evidence O’Brien acted lawfully |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Nozie, 2009-NMSC-018 (2009-NMSC-018) (knowledge of victim’s status required for battery on a peace officer)
- State v. Tsosie, 2011-NMCA-115 (2011-NMCA-115) (DRA interpretation; intoxication does not immunize criminal conduct)
- State v. Correa, 2009-NMSC-051 (2009-NMSC-051) (intoxication not criminal, but offenses still punishable)
- State v. Johnson, 2009-NMSC-049 (2009-NMSC-049) (security guards as employees for purposes of battery on school personnel)
- State v. Orosco, 113 N.M. 780 (1992) (review of jury instructions where omitted element; de novo standard)
- State v. Castro, 2002-NMCA-093 (2002-NMCA-093) (fundamental error review when essential element omitted from instruction)